Durham E-Theses

Persons and patterns of faith in St. John's gospel

Hackett, Bryan Malcolm

How to cite:

Hackett, Bryan Malcolm (1997) Persons and patterns of faith in St. John's gospel, Durham theses,
Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5079/

Use policy

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or
charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:
a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source
a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses
the full-text is not changed in any way
The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.
Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details.

Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP
e-mail: e-theses.admin@dur.ac.uk Tel: +44 0191 334 6107
http://etheses.dur.ac.uk
 1
P E R S O N S AND P A T T E R N S O F F A I T H IN S T . J O H N ' S G O S P E L

B y Bryan Hackett,
D e g r e e of Master of Arts,
University of D u r h a m 1997.

ABSTRACT

St. J o h n tells his readers that his purpose for writing the Gospel is 'in
o r d e r t h a t y o u m a y b e l i e v e ' . T h i s c h a l l e n g e s u s t o investigate h o w he
p e r s u a d e s r e a d e r s t o believe, a n d w h a t he p e r s u a d e s t h e m t o believe. His
use of l a n g u a g e c o n c e n t r a t e s on t h e activities of believing a n d knowing. His
m e t h o d is t o c h o o s e t o tell t h e stories of the e n c o u n t e r s of individuals and
g r o u p s with Christ, rather than to make long theological statements.
T h e d e v e l o p m e n t of literary criticism has g i v e n us a n opportunity to
e x a m i n e t h e s e stories with a n appropriate methodology. Narrative criticism, in
particular, h a s b e e n d e v e l o p e d recently on the G o s p e l of J o h n . Whilst still in
its early d a y s , m u c h promising w o r k has already b e e n done.
I h a v e u s e d the results of this w o r k to investigate how J o h n uses
c h a r a c t e r s t o c o n v e y t h e nature of faith. I have c h o s e n t h r e e c h a r a c t e r s ,
n a m e l y , N i c o d e m u s , t h e S a m a r i t a n w o m a n , a n d t h e blind m a n . I draw out the
c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n e a c h of t h e m a n d with other parts of the Gospel, as well
a s e m p h a s i s i n g t h e distinctiveness of e a c h e p i s o d e . T h r o u g h a survey of the
plot, the t h e m e s , the characters a n d the various literary devices, I explore how
t h e s e c h a r a c t e r s j o u r n e y in faith, a n d how at the s a m e t i m e , s o d o e s the
reader.
At the s a m e time, I use t h e work of Michael Polanyi, the scientist a n d
p h i l o s o p h e r of k n o w l e d g e , as a b a c k g r o u n d f r a m e w o r k for a discussion of
faith, a n d against w h i c h to m e a s u r e the thought of J o h n . Polanyi's philosophy
has b e e n c o m p a r e d with J o h n , especially for its stress on an indwelling truth,
o n t h e p e r s o n a l n a t u r e of k n o w l e d g e , a n d the participatory a n d responsive
role of the person s e e k i n g revelation.
P E R S O N S A N D P A T T E R N S O F FAITH IN ST. J O H N ' S G O S P E L

by
Bryan M a l c o l m Hackett

A Thesis Submitted
for t h e Degree of Master of Arts

University of D u r h a m
D e p a r t m e n t of T h e o l o g y
1997

The copyright of this thesis rests

with the author. No quotation
from it should be published
without the written consent of the
author and information derived
from it should be acknowledged.

r 1 DEC 1998
CONTENTS

C h a p t e r O n e : Introduction
1 .The G o s p e l of J o h n 6
2. Personal K n o w l e d g e : Michael Polanyi 10
3. Exploring J o h a n n i n e Faith 16

C h a p t e r T w o : T h e A p p l i c a t i o n of L i t e r a r y C r i t i c i s m to the Gospel
of J o h n
1. Introduction 17
2. Stories, Histories a n d Biblical Interpretation 17
3. T y p e s of Literary Criticism 19
4. Narrative Criticism in Detail 21
5. Narrative Criticism, Faith a n d Revelation 26
6. D e v e l o p m e n t of Literary Criticism of the Fourth Gospel 27
7. Literary Criticism a n d the Johannine C o m m u n i t y 34
8. From T h e o r y to Practice 37

C h a p t e r T h r e e : N i c o d e m u s the Pharisee
1. Introduction 38
2. Literary Criticism a n d N i c o d e m u s 40
3. N i c o d e m u s , T i m e a n d Understanding 54
4. N i c o d e m u s as a Contrast to Other Characters 56
5. C o n c l u s i o n 65

Chapter Four : A Samaritan Woman

I. Introduction 67
2. T h e Samaritan W o m a n in Pre - Literary Critical Perspectives 67
3. Literary Critical A p p r o a c h e s 72
4. Revelation a n d K n o w i n g G o d 79
5. C o n c l u s i o n 82

Chapter Five : A B l i n d Man

1. Introduction 84
2. T h e Blind M a n in Pre- Literary Critical Perspectives 84
3. Literary Critical A p p r o a c h e s 92
 4
4. Dialogue a n d Faith 98

5. C o n c l u s i o n 102

Chapter Six : Conclusion 105

Bibliography 108
Declaration

I hereby declare that no part of the material contained in this thesis has
previously b e e n submitted for a d e g r e e in a n y other University or College.

Copyright

T h e copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it

s h o u l d be p u b l i s h e d without his prior written consent a n d information derived
from it s h o u l d be a c k n o w l e d g e d .
 Chapter O n e

introduction

Contents:

1. T h e G o s p e l of J o h n
2. Personal K n o w l e d g e : M i c h a e l Polanyi
3. Exploring J o h a n n i n e Faith

1. T h e G o s p e l of J o h n
T h e purpose of this dissertation is to e x a m i n e how St. J o h n attempts to
a c h i e v e what he s a y s is the central goal of the Fourth Gospel, that the reader
m a y b e l i e v e in t h e Risen Christ (20. 31). M y a p p r o a c h is t w o f o l d . I shall be
utilising t h e r e s e a r c h e s of literary critics s o a s to highlight J o h n ' s skills as a
w r i t e r in p u r s u i n g his a i m ; a n d at t h e s a m e t i m e I s h a l l be u s i n g , as a
s u b s i d i a r y t h e m e , the w o r k of a p h i l o s o p h e r of k n o w l e d g e , Michael Polanyi,
w h i c h p r o v i d e s a n i l l u m i n a t i n g t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y p e r s p e c t i v e on faith a n d
k n o w l e d g e , having m u c h in c o m m o n with J o h n a n d helping us to understand
him. Issues of faith a n d k n o w l e d g e n e c e s s a r i l y involve us in a n a r e n a of
cross-disciplinary concern and dispute. Biblical hermeneutics and
s c h o l a r s h i p , t h e o l o g i e s of revelation, a n d epistemology, are a m o n g s t those
t o p i c s w h i c h w o u l d h a v e t o be e x p l o r e d in m u c h m o r e d e p t h in order to
u n d e r s t a n d t h e w i d e r significances of t h e s e contributions. T h i s introductory
c h a p t e r takes a brief look at the g o s p e l in q u e s t i o n , together with a survey of
the w o r k of Polanyi. T h i s initial survey of s o m e of the crucial issues is followed
by a look at the m e t h o d o l o g y of a p p r o a c h in chapter 2. I shall then use three
c h a r a c t e r s f r o m the g o s p e l to illustrate how J o h n c o n v e y s his c o n v i c t i o n s
about believing a n d k n o w i n g the Risen Christ.

T h o s e w h o c o m e t o b e l i e v e in Christ g e n e r a l l y c o m e to believe in a
Christ w h o is a c o m p o s i t e picture of t h e four very distinctive portraits of Christ
presented by the four Evangelists. T h e m a j o r i t y of b e l i e v e r s - a n d n o n -
believers - are not very a w a r e of the nature of a n d reasons for Matthew, Mark,
L u k e a n d J o h n writing s u c h varied s k e t c h e s of their Lord. J o h n ' s Christ is I
believe t h e most recognisably 'different' of the four presentations, a n d I wish
to r e s p o n d creatively to that u n i q u e n e s s , without putting undue weight on the
differences over the similarities.
 7
William T e m p l e o n c e wrote of St. J o h n ' s characteristic m e n t a l i t y :
' He often records argument in debate, but he does not argue from premises to conclusions as
a method of apprehending truth. Rather he puts together the various constituent parts of truth
and contemplates them in their relations to one another. Thus he seems to say "lool< at A; now
lool< at B; now at AB; now at C; now at BC; now at AC; now at D and E; now at ABE; now at CE",
and so on in any variety of combination that facilitates new insight. It is the method of artistic
apprehension, and is appropriate to truth which is in no way dependent on, or derived from,
other truth, but makes its own direct appeal to reason, heart and conscience'.''
J o h n tells his story by w a y of allusion, metaphor, a n d poetry. His vocabulary is
full of w o r d s that are e n c a s e d in layer u p o n layer of m e a n i n g : glory, truth,
k n o w l e d g e , r e g e n e r a t i o n , belief, w o r d , life, light, love a n d m a n y more. There
are many long and complex d i s c o u r s e s w h i c h are i n v o l v e d a n d thought -
p r o v o k i n g . J o h n g l e a n s patterns a n d associations b e t w e e n his many themes.
He d w e l l s o n the spiritual significance of the factual events in J e s u s ' life, a n d
he c o n s t a n t l y l o o k s fonward t o the future significance a n d implications of the
gospel.
W h a t h a s t h e d i s t i n c t i v e n e s s of the J o h a n n i n e Christ to do with the
nature of belief? N o g o s p e l h a s b e e n subject t o s o m u c h dispute in such a
v a r i e d w a y o v e r its origins a n d p u r p o s e . It is the most spiritual, or the most
h u m a n ; it is the most J e w i s h or t h e most Greek; it is the eariiest or the latesL2
But s o m e t i m e s speculation over the authorship, or the J o h a n n i n e community,
or the p h i l o s o p h i c a l milieu, or cultural o r historical circumstances, has been
a l l o w e d to s t a n d in the w a y of a consideration of the particular contours of this
g o s p e l . W e are t o l d very clearly the a u t h o r ' s p r o c l a i m e d persuasive purpose,
that it has b e e n written " in o r d e r that y o u may believe that J e s u s is the Christ,
the S o n of G o d , a n d that t h r o u g h this faith y o u may have life by his n a m e ' (20.
3 1 , R E B ). T h e d e c l a r e d p u r p o s e of the book is identical with the purpose
J e s u s reveals for his presence in t h e w o r i d , a n d the very nature of eternal life :
T h i s is eternal life : to k n o w y o u the only true G o d , a n d Jesus Christ w h o m you
have sent'. (17.3).
In a w a y in w h i c h the other gospels a n d the J o h a n n i n e Epistles are not,
s o m e maintain that J o h n ' s g o s p e l is christocentric rather than theocentric.3 in
the g o s p e l J e s u s is light, in 1 J o h n that is said of G o d ; knowing G o d d e p e n d s
o n k n o w i n g J e s u s in the gospel, but in 1 J o h n it is an u n m e d i a t e d experience;

"I W.Temple. Readings in St. John's Gospel (1908),p.xxi.

2 See, e.g., David Rensberqer, Overcoming the World (1988), ch.1.

3 E.g,J.Ueu, Theology of the Johannine Epistles (1991), p.78.

 8
for t h e g o s p e l ' a b i d i n g ' is o n l y p o s s i b l e in Christ, but in 1 J o h n it is a l s o
possible directly in G o d . J e s u s is the origin of truth ( 1 6 : 1 3 - 1 4 ) , which can be
a part of present e x p e r i e n c e . K n o w i n g G o d is the personal activity of knowing
J e s u s , a n d s o truth is a p p r o a c h e d in personal terms. But k n o w i n g G o d is not
s i m p l y a matter of orientating m i n d a n d s o u l in a Christ-wards direction. The
d e c i s i o n for faith h a s ethical a n d ecclesiological c o n s e q u e n c e s - 'anyone w h o
d w e l l s in me, a s I d w e l l in h i m , bears m u c h fruit' (15.5). T h e w o r d s used to
d e s c r i b e t h e relationship of Father a n d S o n , of Son a n d believer, a n d believer
with believer, are w o r d s like love, trust, know a n d a b i d e , w h i c h are all m u c h
^more c o m m o n in J o h n t h a n in a n y other g o s p e l . What sort of picture of J e s u s
w o u l d the c h u r c h have without t h e J o h a n n i n e Christ?

T h i s is the most personal of all the gospels. T h e author tells of his close
a s s o c i a t i o n with J e s u s (e.g., 21.3,4.); the narrative unfolds as a s e q u e n c e of
intricately c o n n e c t e d a n d e n v e l o p i n g personal encounters between Christ a n d
a s s o r t e d p e o p l e w h o manifest varying d e g r e e s of increasing faith or unbelief;
a n d it is the g o s p e l w h i c h most cleariy a n d explicitly a d d r e s s e s and involves
its r e a d e r s h i p , 'that y o u m a y b e l i e v e ' . At the outset, t h e n , we m a y expect
issues of believing a n d k n o w i n g to be personal both in character and in their
l a n g u a g e of e x p r e s s i o n . In this g o s p e l J o h n p r e s e n t s t h e s e issues in the
l a n g u a g e of e n c o u n t e r a n d relationship. The characters w h o walk in a n d out
of the narrative are not there primarily to be recipients of teaching or objects of
m i r a c l e - w o r k i n g , but a l s o to be representative e x a m p l e s of the stages along
the j o u r n e y s of faith a n d unbelief.

T h e t h e o l o g i c a l Christocentricity a n d narrative centrality of J e s u s c a n

be o b s e r v e d in J o h n ' s d e p l o y m e n t of the cast of s u p p o r t i n g actors. Every
c h a r a c t e r w o r k s in t w o w a y s . O n e w a y is to bring out J e s u s ' character by
giving him v a r i e d individuals a n d groups with w h o m to interact The other way
is t o d e m o n s t r a t e a v a r i e t y of r e s p o n s e s to J e s u s , i n v o l v i n g d e g r e e s of
understanding and misunderstanding. As Culpepper notes, the other
c h a r a c t e r s rarely interact o n e with another, a n d J e s u s is at the centre of all
e x c h a n g e s , w h e t h e r he is a b s e n t or present.4 What difference, then, has the
i n c a r n a t i o n m a d e to the nature of Christian k n o w l e d g e a n d belief? H o w has
the r e d e m p t i o n affected the h u m a n capacity for belief, or the object of belief?

T h e v e r y first w o r d s Christ a s k s in this g o s p e l a r e , " W h a t are y o u

l o o k i n g f o r ? " (1.38). D y n a m i c s of q u e s t i o n i n g a n d a n s w e r i n g , of seeking a n d
finding, of finding a n d losing a g a i n , permeate this g o s p e l . Pilate s p e a k s more

4 A.Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel (1983), p. 145.

 9
t h a n for h i m s e l f w h e n he a s k s " W h a t is t r u t h ? " T h e w e a l t h of historical,
g e o g r a p h i c a l a n d p h y s i c a l detail t h o r o u g h l y e a r t h s w h a t c o u l d o t h e r w i s e
s e e m a m e t a p h y s i c a l quest. T h e challenge J e s u s posed of Martha is the one
p o s e d of e v e r y reader of this g o s p e l : " D o y o u believe this?"

J o h n g i v e s the J u d a e o - C h r i s t i a n tradition a new vocabulary, one that

m o r e t h a n t h e o t h e r g o s p e l s b e c o m e s the d e c i s i v e s o u r c e of w o r d s a n d
p h r a s e s for the d e v e l o p m e n t of Christianity. For the c h u r c h ' s favourite word,
love, a l t h o u g h quite c o m m o n in the Psalms a n d in St.Paul, is primarily found
in o n l y this o n e of the four gospels. T h e verb a n d the n o u n appear 5 4 times in
J o h n ; L u k e is the next closest with a m e r e 13 m e n t i o n s . T h e r e is an e v e n
g r e a t e r contrast with t h e v e r b 'know', w h i c h c o m e s in its various forms over
100 t i m e s in J o h n ; a g a i n , t h e nearest Synoptic is Luke with about 33 uses.
Other words which are very p r o m i n e n t in J o h n but are far less s o in the
S y n o p t i c s include : see, truly, truth, believe, w o r d , world, life, sent, testify, sin ,
c o m e s , c o m i n g , a n d hour. This is the only g o s p e l in which J e s u s addresses a
s p e c i f i c g r o u p of p e o p l e a s his o w n friends, a n d m i x e s the c h a l l e n g e a n d
threat of " y o u are c l e a n t h r o u g h the w o r d w h i c h I h a v e s p o k e n to you", with
the comfort a n d consolation of k n o w i n g things a n d knowing people. He knows
w h e n his i m p e n d i n g d e p a r t u r e will occur; he k n o w s w h y it has c o m e about;
a n d he k n o w s w h e r e he is g o i n g . Every detail of J e s u s ' revelation of what he
k n o w s a n d w h a t he w a n t s his followers t o know is e x c e e d i n g l y personal a n d
intimate in its reference a n d application. T h e r e s e e m s to be an inextricable
link b e t w e e n Christ's proffered friendship a n d the nature of the believer's faith
a n d k n o w l e d g e of him.

A n y account of the issues of belief a n d k n o w l e d g e in the Fourth Gospel

must take note of h o w m a r k e d l y this g o s p e l gives such attention to personal
relationships, to t h e truth that our relation to G o d is that w h i c h s h o w s itself in
relation to o u r fellow h u m a n - b e i n g s ; a n d how in t e r m s of talk of Christ, the
g r e a t bulk of t h e F o u r t h G o s p e l is t a k e n u p with a description of h u m a n
relations, with J e s u s inviting p e o p l e to learn from that personal contact what
m a n n e r of m a n he w a s . J o h n ' s special e m p h a s i s o n love is detailed in the
g o s p e l b y t h e w a y in w h i c h ' m e n a n d w o m e n in t u r n a r e invited to learn
t h r o u g h e v e r y stage of their creaturely existence what it m e a n s to be loved
a n d l o v i n g . He m a d e himself o n e with us that by that union we might learn to
know him'.s

5 A.Ecclestone, The Scaffolding of Spirit (1987), p.111.

 10
2. Personal K n o w l e d g e a n d Michael Polanvi
P h i l o s o p h i c a l a n d scientific o p i n i o n s a b o u t the nature of truth, reality,
a n d t h e s c o p e of h u m a n k n o w l e d g e h a v e since the Enlightenment tended to
set t h e t r e n d for t h e o l o g i c a l discussions of these issues. But a s the challenge
a n d critique of s u c h e n l i g h t e n m e n t thinking h a s p r o g r e s s e d , s o new ideas
h a v e c o m e t o t h e fore o v e r t h e nature of k n o w l e d g e . T h e thought of one
p h i l o s o p h e r in p a r t i c u l a r h a s g a i n e d c u r r e n c y in the s c i e n c e a n d religion
d e b a t e s , a n d his a n a l y s i s a n d t e r m i n o l o g y do, at first sight, tie in remarkably
w e l l with J o h n ' s t r e a t m e n t of faith a n d k n o w l e d g e . T h i s thinker is Michael
Polanyi.
Polanyi d e v e l o p e d a relational rather t h a n a n objectivising conception
of t h e k n o w e r a n d t h e k n o w n ; stressing that our relationship t o a person or
t h i n g is p r i m a r y to our k n o w i n g t h e m . Rational, c o n c e p t u a l knowledge arises
out of the k n o w l e d g e by a c q u a i n t a n c e that characterises our h u m a n situation
in t h e u n i v e r s e . B e c a u s e w e a r e a c q u a i n t e d w i t h o u r u n i v e r s e a s its
inhabitants, a n d b e c a u s e w e are in a concrete relation to it, we c a n begin to
d e v e l o p , by the use of our intellectual a n d other faculties, some account of our
k n o w l e d g e . E v e n t h e m o r e rational a n d abstract f o r m s of k n o w l e d g e are no
e x c e p t i o n s t o t h e c o n c r e t e m o d e of o u r e v e r y d a y interaction with reality.
Rather, t h e y are c o n t i n u o u s w i t h t h e m b e c a u s e t h e y arise f r o m within a
c o n c r e t e r e l a t i o n . T h e c r u c i a l c o n c e p t is o n e of i n d w e l l i n g . We d o not
c o n t e m p l a t e reality f r o m t h e outside, f r o m a godlike distance - 'objectivism' -
but w e indwell the w o r l d a s part of it. All k n o w l e d g e arises out of a n d as a
function of relation. ( T h i s m e t a p h o r of indwelling can be s e e n to correspond
with its use in J o h n ' s g o s p e l , w h e r e the S o n indwells the Father, believers
i n d w e l l Christ, a n d the Spirit i n d w e l l s t h e m ) . Polanyi's is a description of a
kind of k n o w l e d g e that is subjective in the sense of being personal, but also
objective in that it is c o n c e r n e d with t h e truth about things. It is a concept of
insightful perception, a n d has occasionally b e e n c o m p a r e d s with attempts by
s c h o l a r s to f i n d a n hierarchical s c h e m e in J o h n ' s g o s p e l , i.e. starting from
m e r e r e g i s t r a t i o n of a v i s u a l i m a g e , t h e n t o l o o k i n g at s o m e t h i n g with
c o n c e n t r a t i o n a n d fascination, t h e n to s e e i n g with unitive understanding, a n d
f i n a l l y t o s e e i n g in t h e s e n s e t h a t o c c u r s b e t w e e n p e o p l e in a loving
encounter.

P o l a n y i ' s v i e w of t r u e h u m a n k n o w l e d g e is t h a t it i n v o l v e s
p e r s o n a l c o m m i t m e n t , a n d the a c c e p t a n c e of personal responsibility for o n e ' s

6 Seee.g. F. Watts and M.WHIiams.The Psychology of Religious Knowing , (1989).

 11
beliefs. T h i s k n o w l e d g e is p e r s o n a l but not subjective - it is objective in the
w a y that it m a k e s contact with a hidden reality. He e m p h a s i s e s that there is no
w a y to f i n d truth unless w e are willing to accept the risk of m a k i n g mistakes
a l o n g t h e w a y . Polanyi's thought is n o w r e g a r d e d a s s e m i n a l , a n d one book.
P e r s o n a l K n o w l e d g e , a s a classic.7 He has b e e n credited with moving modern
p h i l o s o p h y a w a y from its inheritance of Enlightenment epistemology.s

F r o m his b a c k g r o u n d a s a scientist, Polanyi e x p o u n d e d the role of

d i s c o v e r y in a t t a i n i n g t r u e k n o w l e d g e . He e x p l a i n e d h o w a p r o c e s s of
d i s c o v e r y involves m u c h t e d i o u s g r o u n d w o r k a n d m a n y setbacks, until o n e
d a y a f l a s h of inspiration h a p p e n s , w h e n insight is g a i n e d of s o m e t h i n g which
d o e s not quite fit t h e n o r m a l rules ( o r the usual limitations of thinking). The
skill of d i s c o v e r y lies in a n ability t o r e c o g n i s e t h e significant facts f r o m
a m o n g s t the vast a r m y of d a t a a n d t h e h u g e variety of h y p o t h e s e s . This is
w h e r e creativity a n d i n v e n t i v e n e s s are n e e d e d - a l o n g with p a s s i o n . 'Any
p r o c e s s of e n q u i r y u n g i r d e d by intellectual p a s s i o n s w o u l d inevitably spread
out into a desert of trivialities'.s Insight d o e s not necessarily m e a n seeing new
facts - it m a y m o r e p r o b a b l y involve s e e i n g new patterns in the s a m e facts.
T h e initial stirrings of t h e ' h u n c h ' a r e the heuristic i d e a s . It is a p e r s o n a l
d e c i s i o n t o act o n the h u n c h , to p u r s u e it. T u r n i n g f r a g m e n t s into a w h o l e is
w h a t that p r o c e s s will involve, o n c e e m b a r k e d o n . It is o n l y the intimations
w h i c h work, not the use of tried a n d tested formulae on familiar data. This area
of i n t i m a t i o n is a k i n d of c a t e g o r y of its o w n , a d i m f o r e - k n o w l e d g e . T h e
imaginative leap is k n o w n by the s e n s e of getting w a r m .

Polanyi t e r m s this a r e a of k n o w l e d g e (i.e. k n o w l e d g e that is not explicit

and e x a c t ) 'tacit k n o w i n g ' - with the e m p h a s i s on the verb rather than the
n o u n . He s u g g e s t s it is in the a r e a not just of understanding, but also of poetic
insight a n d t h e g r a s p of moral v a l u e s . S o m e t i m e s he also u s e d a phrase to
c o v e r this a r e a ; 'we k n o w m o r e t h a n w e can tell'. In say, the recognition of
y o u r pet d o g , y o u could not list its statistics a n d m e a s u r e m e n t s a n d features,
but y o u w o u l d know it a s your d o g a m o n g s t m a n y other similar ones. We have
a p o w e r to recognise a w h o l e , e v e n if we are not too certain about some of the
parts. We d o not f o c u s o n all the parts a n d then focus o n the whole, but we do
b e g i n t o build u p o u r o w n picture of w h a t w e h a v e identified s o far. T h e

7 Watts and Williams, Religious Knowing, p.56.

8 C. Gunton, Knowledge and Culture, in H. Montefiore, ed., The Gospel and Contemporan/
Culture, London .Mowbray ,1992, p.85.

9iVl. Polanvi, Personal Knowledge, London : Routledge Kegan Paul,1958, p. 135.

 12
p r e c o n d i t i o n s for d i s c o v e r y are, underlying all this, both a desire to know, a n d
a belief that there is s o m e t h i n g to be k n o w n .

T h e structure of tacit k n o w i n g involves t w o parts - the subsidiary a n d the

focal. T h e s u b s i d i a r y parts are the details f r o m w h i c h we attend, and the focal
part is t h e w h o l e , the m e a n i n g o n w h i c h o u r attention is f o c u s s e d . But to get
f r o m o n e to a n o t h e r d o e s not involve formal logical reasoning; it d o e s involve
i m a g i n a t i o n . All t h e f o r m a l f r a m e w o r k s of h u m a n science a n d knowledge are
d e p e n d e n t on personal c h o i c e s about procedure a n d investigation.
Polanyi particularly c o n c e n t r a t e d on the s e n s e - p e r c e p t i o n of sight. He
p o i n t e d out h o w m u c h w e t a k e it for g r a n t e d , a n d forgot how b u s y a n d
a m a z i n g a p r o c e s s it is. O u r p o w e r s of m e n t a l integration c a n likewise be
t a k e n for granted - or t h e y c a n be trained for further use. Polanyi himself made
t h e c o n n e c t i o n w i t h Gestalt p s y c h o l o g y : 'But h a v i n g realised that personal
participation p r e d o m i n a t e s both in t h e a r e a of tacit a n d explicit knowledge, w e
are r e a d y to t r a n s p o s e t h e f i n d i n g s of Gestalt p s y c h o l o g y into a t h e o r y of
knowledge'.io Polanyi also connected his philosophy with the child
d e v e l o p m e n t w o r k of Piaget, w h o demonstrated how babies begin to build up
their f r a m e w o r k of s p a c e a n d time b y their o w n activities of m o v i n g , looking
a n d g r a s p i n g . Piaget s a y s c h i l d r e n d e v e l o p new levels of logically dealing
with the w o r i d , m o v i n g from o n e to another. He calls t h e m schemata. Polanyi
thought the h u m a n race d e v e l o p e d in m u c h the s a m e way. 11

All this implies that in our k n o w l e d g e there is a kind of faith, that is, a
faith in a reality w h i c h w e can g r a d u a l l y c o m p r e h e n d . We all have a reservoir
of this tacit k n o w i n g , a n d w h a t e v e r our educational background, we can come
to u n d e r s t a n d our m a n y levelled w o r i d b e c a u s e t h e mind is always integrating
the particulars of a n y situation into higher levels of meaning.
At o n e point Polanyi elaborates a personal creed :
' I declare myself committed to the belief in an external reality gradually
accessible to knowing, and I regard all true understanding as an
intimation of such a reality, which, being real, may yet reveal itself
to our deepened understanding in an indefinite range of
unexpected manifestations. I accept the obligation to search for
the truth through my own intimations of reality, knowing that there is
and can be no strict rule by which my conclusions can be

10 M.Polanvi. The Study of Man. (1958),p.28.

11 Polanvi. Personal Knowledge, p.395.

 13
justified'.12
He cited C h r i s t o p h e r C o l u m b u s a s a n instance of a c o m m i t m e n t to discovery.
T h e lack of confidence in 'the rules' a s such frees us to face reality unfettered.
Reality is itself s o m e t h i n g that d r a w s us o n , that is attractive a n d beguiling. 'If
w e h a v e g r a s p e d a true a n d d e e p - s e a t e d a s p e c t of reality, t h e n its future
m a n i f e s t a t i o n s will be u n e x p e c t e d confirmations of our present k n o w l e d g e of
it'.13 T h e m o r e d e p t h of m e a n i n g , t h e m o r e real s o m e t h i n g is. So, Polanyi
w e n t o n t o a r g u e , a h u m a n being or an idea is more real than a cobblestone,
b e c a u s e the former has more depth of meaning.

H o w d o e s the k n o w e r relate to t h e tacit particulars w h i c h are clues to

the d e e p e r reality? T h r o u g h indwelling, says Polanyi, this relationship
d e v e l o p s . 'Indwelling involves a tacit reliance o n our a w a r e n e s s of particulars
not u n d e r o b s e r v a t i o n , m a n y of t h e m u n s p e c i f i a b l e . We h a v e to interiorise
t h e s e a n d , in d o i n g so, must c h a n g e o u r mental existence. There is nothing
definite to w h i c h w e c a n hold fast in such an a c t It is a free commitment'. i4 A s
a child g r o w s , he incorporates skills a n d experience w h i c h become part of his
tacit k n o w l e d g e , a n d a m o n g s t these is the use of language. Both in the use of
l a n g u a g e , a n d in the w i d e r use of skills, there are s o m e c o m m o n inherited
p a t t e r n s f r o m t h e c h i l d ' s f a m i l y a n d s u r r o u n d i n g s , but t h e r e is a l s o a n
i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n a l e l e m e n t . K n o w l e d g e that has b e e n i n w a r d l y d i g e s t e d
b e c o m e s an e x t e n s i o n of t h e personality. In using it, y o u concentrate with it,
not o n it. Faith a n d risk a n d k n o w l e d g e are all c o n n e c t e d . Instead of a n
i m p e r s o n a l set of rules, P o l a n y i talks of a s o c i e t y of e x p l o r e r s , w h e r e the
c o m m i t t e d p e r s o n in a g r o u p learns skills f r o m the group's tradition in order to
d e v e l o p his o w n relationship with reality. It is c o m m i t m e n t w h i c h connects the
p a s t with t h e f u t u r e , t h e k n o w n with t h e b a r e l y - k n o w n . A s Polanyi puts it
a c r o s s , w e c a n learn the skills of s e e i n g in a new way, by trying to find new
patterns, g u i d e d by a belief that there is a discoverable reality.

F r o m his w o r k i n g e x p e r i e n c e of t h e scientific c o m m u n i t y , Polanyi

b e c a m e c o n v i n c e d that s c i e n c e h a d to be free f r o m a n y f o r m of external
authority, a n d a l s o that both a u t h o r i t y a n d tradition are vital e l e m e n t s of the
free c o m m u n i t y of s c i e n c e . T h e c o m b i n a t i o n of scholastic discipline a n d the
d e s i r e for originality allow for fresh d i s c o v e r i e s eventually to be recognised.

12 Polanvi, Personal Knowledge. p.311.

13 M. Polanyi, The Unaccountable Element in Science, Philosophv. vol.XXXVIII, no.139, Jan.

1962, p. 13.

14 M.Polanyi, On the Modem Mind, in Encounter XXIV. May 1965, p.9.

 14
T h e scientific w o r i d is a s p o n t a n e o u s , s e l f - g o v e r n i n g o r g a n i s a t i o n . It is a
c o m m u n i t y of t r u s t , a l w a y s i n v o l v e d in f r e e a n d d e l i c a t e l y m a d e v a l u e
j u d g m e n t s . In s c i e n c e a s in art, traditions are h a n d e d o n by apprenticeships.
T h e w a y l a w d e v e l o p s is a n o t h e r p a r a l l e l . In all t h e s e c o m m u n i t i e s ,
k n o w l e d g e relies o n no i m p e r s o n a l tests but o n the skills a n d responsibility of
people.15

T r u t h is both p e r s o n a l a n d s o c i a l , s h a r e d . Individual insight has t o be

referred to c o m m o n tradition a n d j u d g m e n t ( b e c a u s e there is no rule by which
to j u d g e i t ) . T h e explorer m a k e s the most of his tradition, a n d finds a sense of
direction, e v e n if no direct answer. At s o m e point c o m e s a leap of imagination,
a n intuition that this is the right answer. With other explorers, he c a n grow in
f e l l o w s h i p of the free pursuit of the truth. Intellectual work has, or s h o u l d have,
a n a t m o s p h e r e of c o n v i v i a l i t y , in w h i c h t w o p e o p l e c a n talk a n d discover
errors, or d i s c o v e r that their different o p i n i o n s are partial expressions of the
s a m e reality.

A n o t h e r key t e r m Polanyi uses is that of 'boundary conditions'. He used

it in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h e x p l a i n i n g h o w life o p e r a t e s by p r i n c i p l e s w h i c h are
m a d e p o s s i b l e a n d limited b y p h y s i c a l a n d c h e m i c a l laws, but yet are not
d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e m . In a g i v e n situation, there are laws operating at a lower
level w h i c h are h a r n e s s e d , a n d principles w h i c h cannot be a c c o u n t e d for o n
the l o w e r level. T h e higher level of organisation in living creatures cannot be
e x p l a i n e d o n the l o w e s t levels. T h e o r g a n i s a t i o n at t h e h i g h e r level w h i c h
i m p o s e s t h e b o u n d a r y c o n d i t i o n is in fact a n integration of t h e particulars o n
t h e l o w e r level into a m e a n i n g f u l w h o l e (whose principle of integration is not
discoverable o n the lower level). T h i s Polanyi connects with the pattern of how
w e k n o w . T h e p o w e r of k n o w i n g a n d g r a s p i n g the w o r i d d e v e l o p s into a
p o w e r of i m a g i n a t i v e l y integrating particulars, revealing their joint m e a n i n g ,
w h i c h is now the higher level c o h e r e n c e in w h i c h t h e y b e c o m e parts. S o the
patterns of the worid mirror the patterns of our knowing.

P o l a n y i held to duality, rather t h a n t o d u a l i s m . He r e m a r k e d o n the

p r o f o u n d difference b e t w e e n m i n d a n d body, yet held that a person exists o n
all levels, with neither the b o u n d a r i e s of the mind being fixed, nor the physical
brain placing a limit o n its activity. K n o w l e d g e of the mind is not the s a m e thing
a s k n o w l e d g e of the brain. For Polanyi, t h e mind is the m e a n i n g of the brain.
T h e h u m a n b e i n g , t h e n , e x i s t s o n different levels, f r o m t h e lowest to t h e
highest. T h e latter explain the former, but not vice v e r s a .

15 M.Polanyi, Knowing and Being, London : Routledge and Kegan Paul,1960, p.66.
 15
T h e p e r s o n t h e n consists not just of the self but of all that the person
d w e l l s in a n d h a s e x t e n d e d itself into. T h e w h o l e p e r s o n is i n v o l v e d in
building up the reservoir of tacit knowing. The highest level is never defined - it
is a l w a y s the latest frontier to be r e a c h e d , a n d further horizons remain. The
pattern of h u m a n learning is t h e c o m b i n i n g of t w o opposite t e n d e n c i e s . T h e
first is the building up of f r a m e w o r k s t o w h i c h new experience is assimilated,
a n d t h e s e c o n d is t h e a d a p t i n g of t h e s e f r a m e w o r k s t o a c c o m m o d a t e new
e x p e r i e n c e . Polanyi t e r m e d t h e m 'dwelling in' a n d 'breaking out'.

Polanyi's religious faith arose from this dedication t o s e e k i n g reality. It

d i d not c o m e f r o m a n y a t t a c h m e n t to the o r t h o d o x c r e e d s o r acceptance of
religious authority. Having s h o w n the need for faith in science a n d knowledge,
he a l l o w e d faith in religious b e l i e f : 'I hold it to be fully consistent with my belief
in t h e transcendent origin of m y beliefs that I should be ever prepared for new
intimations of d o u b t s in respect of t h e m ' . i e F o r h i m , t h e religious account of
m e a n i n g w a s not i n c o m p a t i b l e but c o m p l e m e n t a r y with the scientific account
of m e a n i n g . Furthermore,
The Christian enquiry is worship. It resembles, not the dwelling within a
great theory of which we enjoy the complete understanding, nor an
immersion in the pattern of a musical masterpiece, but the heuristic
upsurge which strives to break through the accepted framework of
thought, guided by the intimations of discoveries still beyond our
horizon. Christian worship sustains, as it were, an eternal, never
to be consummated hunch, a heuristic vision, which is accepted
for the sake of its unresolvable tension'.17
S o religious understanding is a skill to be learnt, received a n d h a n d e d o n , and
G o d ' s nature c a n o n l y be k n o w n t h r o u g h c o m m i t m e n t to him, a n d through
w o r s h i p of h i m . R e l i g i o n is a s y s t e m of f e e l i n g s a n d t h o u g h t s in w h i c h the
h u m a n m i n d c a n d w e l l b y m e a n s of the imaginative integration of the clues it
provides. T h e content of Christian teaching a n d liturgy is a collection of clues,
and from this the meaning of f a i t h is a c h i e v e d v i a t h e tacit art of
c o m p r e h e n s i o n . S i n c e the universe consists of hierarchy of levels, religion is
the tacit integrating of clues to its higher level meanings. Whilst h u m a n s strive
t o find m e a n i n g , t h e r e is a l s o a creative p o w e r at w o r k w h i c h m e e t s this
striving - Polanyi s o m e t i m e s called it 'grace'. In prayer as in science, there are
patterns or r h y t h m s of d i s c o v e r y in w h i c h there is an urge t o meet a reality
w h i c h is felt to be there. At o n e point Polanyi d e s c r i b e d the highest mystical

16 Quoted in D. Scott, Michael Polanvi. (1996), p. 183.

17 Polanvi. Personal Knowledge. p.281.

 16
Vision a s a letting g o of the categories of our our normal seeing, so that we see
all t h i n g s a s features of G o d . i a

3. Exploring J o h a n n i n e Faith
T h e d o m i n a n c e of faith a s a t h e m e in the Fourth G o s p e l c o u l d be
a r g u e d in a n u m b e r of w a y s . A l t h o u g h statistics can be misleading and have
t o be s e e n in t h e w i d e r p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e g r e a t f r e q u e n c y of v o c a b u l a r y
c o n n e c t e d with believing a n d k n o w i n g is very telling. But the bulk of studies on
faith in J o h n ( a s in the other gospels) has b e e n d o n e b y scholars of traditio-
h i s t o r i c a l t r a d i t i o n s , a n d t h e r e has b e e n little a t t e n t i o n to the distinctive
configurations of belief in the Four Gospels. Eariier treatments suffer from two
s h o r t c o m i n g s in m e t h o d o l o g y . 19 T h e first is a n inclination to discuss almost
e x c l u s i v e l y the w o r d s c o n n e c t e d with faith, ignoring their narrative context
w h e n c e they derive their m e a n i n g . T h e s e c o n d is a concentration on believing
a s a n i d e a rather t h a n a n activity, an i d e a often increasingly divorced from the
v a r i e t y of literary a n d d r a m a t i c t e c h n i q u e s u s e d b y the author t o c o n v e y his
m e s s a g e a n d to integrate it into the wider story.

Instead of this, I shall e n d e a v o u r to e n g a g e in some literary analysis of

t h e text, a n d e m p l o y a l o n g s i d e that a f r a m e w o r k for d i s c u s s i n g issues of
b e l i e v i n g , d e r i v e d f r o m P o l a n y i . I h a v e f o u n d it n e c e s s a r y to e m p l o y a
f r a m e w o r k , b e c a u s e faith is a subject w h e r e it is hard to decide a n d to limit the
issues for d i s c u s s i o n , a n d Polanyi's work gives us s o m e hints a n d directions.
T h e f o c u s t h r o u g h o u t will b e o n t h e p e r s o n a l nature of faith a s e x p r e s s e d
t h r o u g h J o h n ' s use of characterisation, a n d the patterns of faith that become
apparent.

18 M. Polanvi. Personal Knowledge, p. 198.

19 E.g., E.K.Lee, The Religious Thought of John , (1950), esp.ch.9.

 17
Chapter Two

The Application of Literary Criticism to the Gospel of John

Contents

1. Introduction
2.Storles, Histories and Biblical Interpretation
3. Types of Literary Criticism
4. Narrative Criticism in Detail
5. Narrative Criticism, Faith and Revelation
6. Development of Literary Criticism of the Fourth Gospel
7. Literary Criticism and the Johannine Community
S.From Theory to Practice

1 .Introduction
In this chapter I shall explore the nature and theory of literary criticism,
its development and present state, with especial regard to its application to
Christian scripture. Then the development of literary critical attitudes to John's
Gospel can be placed in context and analysed. The purpose of this is to show
how literary criticism unveils the dynamics of the text, and especially how John
involves his readers in the story in the pursuit of persuading them to believe.
Because in the case studies in the next three chapters I shall be concentrating
on the characters, I shall use this chapter to show a broad overview of literary
critical approaches, before focussing on the three characters and the theme of
believing.

2.Stories. Histories and the Word of God

How did the Bible come to be seen as a suitable area for literary critical
exploration? The ways of reading the Bible can be as diverse as its authors
and modes of composition. However as far as nineteenth and twentieth
century biblical critical scholarship has been concerned, the dominant
approach to the study of scripture has been to use an 'objective' and scientific
analysis of the books in the hope of understanding ways of life and thought at
the time(s) of biblical composition. In the historical order of their development,
historical critical methods have concentrated on the sources of material which
has ended up in the Bible, on the growth of the forms of particular Bible
 18
passages, and on the role of the author in selecting and using the material for
a book. These methods have all led to a deepening of our understanding both
of the Bible and of its original environments.

Yet the Bible cannot be fitted ( either by believers or by non-believers )

into the sole category of history books. Its many voices bear witness primarily
to the human experience of what are believed to be the ways of God. The
Bible tells the story of God's relationship with his people. The Gospels tell the
story of Jesus' life and ministry in the context of that relationship. The Bible, as
a religious text, demands an involvement on the part of the reader that is not
demanded of the reader of Tacitus or LIvy. The focus of attention has shifted,
thanks to literary criticism, away from the community behind the text, or its
sources, or its author, to the way the text operates itself as a literary text, rather
than as an historical source, and to how it relates to the reader; although, as
time has gone on, some literary critics have increasingly returned to some
consideration of the historical setting. 20 The recognition that the Gospels are
pieces of literature, whilst not new, has now led to the application of the
techniques of secular literary criticism to sacred narratives. This has not
entailed abandoning historical criticism, but rather pursuing other lines of
inquiry, such as character development, plots and sub-plots, themes and
rhetoric.
But if the gospels are more than just history, are they not also more than
just literature? Yes they are, but to study them as literature does not mean the
same as identifying them as 'mere' literature.The evangelists themselves
chose a mode of communication - narrative discourse - to express themselves.
To use the narrative form to represent reality, to tell stories about life, is a
medium which belongs both to art and history, and utilises the conventions of
both to the utmost.
The main area of concern, then, for the biblical literary critic, is the
relationship between the text and its readers. Who wrote it, when , why, and
where, are questions that are, to them, of secondary importance to the
subject, although in practice some literary critical scholars do prefer still to
include them - as we shall see in the debate between Culpepper and Stibbe.
With particular relevance to this thesis, it is important to note that the
development of the concept of the implied author tends to replace interest in
the actual author. Questions about the implied author's theology should, in
theory, be considered from within the text alone, and not from external

20 See, e.g., G.S.SIoyan, What are they saving about John ?. (1991).
 19
material, although in practice the influence of the Old Testament in particular
comes up for discussion. All that is needed to comprehend the literary
meaning and impact of a narrative should be garnered from the study of the
implied author.

The key differences between historical and literary criticism are fourfold.
Firstly, literary criticism prefers, to put it crudely, aesthetics to archaeology. The
text, as it is, in its finished form, is the sole text of interest, and not any eariier
variants, extant or imagined. Secondly, literary critics take an holistic
approach. Preferring a sense of the whole to a preoccupation with parts,
literary critics have sensitivity to the role of any item within its full context.
Thirdly, whereas historical critics treat the text as a window on to another time
and another place, literary critics regard the text as a mirror, which reflects the
reader's own world and conveys its own story at the same time. Fourthly,
whilst historical critics basically approach texts on the assumption that they are
products of an evolutionary process of development, literary critics assume
that texts are forms of communication. Historical critics move from historical
event to oral tradition to early written sources and then to the final text. But
literary criticism is heavily indebted in its philosophical origins to theories
about communication, in which the author and text and reader interact with
one another. The text stands in an horizontal plane between the author and
reader, unlike the evolutionary model when it is at one end of the vertical axis
as the finished product.

3. Types of Literary Criticism

Although it is impossible to reach a clear-cut categorisation of the
varied ways of reading the text, it is possible to give an idea of the general
groupings into which they can be placed. One helpful form of categorisation of
the various theoretical approaches is based on the idea of M. H. Abrams.21
When the focus of attention is on the author, the critical approaches are
'expressive' types of criticism, and the criteria for evaluating the text is by its
faithfulness and appropriateness for conveying the writer's opinion. When the
centre of attention is the reader, the critical approaches are called 'pragmatic'
types, and the consideration is of the methods and degree of success in
moving the reader. When the text is the issue, they are 'objective' types of
criticism and the text is examined in its own right as a world unto itself. When
21 M.H. Abrams, A Glossary of Literary Terms. 4th ed., New York, Hoit 1981, quoted in
iVI.Powell, 'WhatisNarrativeCriticism?' (1990), p. 11.
 20
the degree of fair representation of reality is the issue, they are called
'mimetic' types of criticism. Under these categories, the approaches I shall
adopt are largely pragmatic.

In practice though, most critical approaches to the Bible have been

grouped into two parties: those concerned with origins, and those concerned
with the reading experience.22 The first group are therefore historical critical,
and the second group literary critical. This second group can be subdivided as
follows in this very brief outline :
i) Structuralism
This movement is a search for meaning in a text which tries to
take account of all kinds of relationships ( e.g. of dynamics, time, theme )
beyond the plot outline alone. The text itself consists of several layers of
structures, one on top of another. The ones lower down, the 'deep structures'
are the most interesting, for they can reveal attitudes which the author may not
have been aware of holding.
ii) Rhetorical Criticism
This discipline seeks to discover how and why a text has the
power to move people. Crucial to understanding a text's effectiveness is an
understanding of the rhetorical situation that is being addressed, and therefore
the work's original audience needs to be comprehended. This school is more
interested in the mechanics than the final product.
iii) Reader Response Criticism
This method of reading studies the reading process in itself.
There is quite a spectrum of types of reader response criticism, but they all
examine the nature of the reader's reaction to the text, and the ways meaning
is brought out of it. Some schools attribute to the reader dominance over the
text, deconstruction being the most famous of these. To counter the
individualism and subjectivity of this style, the idea of interpretive communities
has been proposed, in which a shared strategy of reading can be adopted.
Theories which put the text and the reader on the same level stress the
interaction between the two. In a sequential reading of a narrative, a reader
will constantly be challenged to confirm, revise or abandon eariier conclusions
about the nature of the story. Moreover, the creative role of the reader will also
try to fill the gaps for which the author has provided no comment.
4} Narrative Criticism
The most important concept of narrative criticism is that of the

22 Powell, Narrative Criticism?, ch.2.

 21
implied reader. Whereas the first three approaches depended, respectively,
on a skilful reader, or an original audience, or a first time audience, narrative
critical methods dwell on the connections between the implied author, the
text, and the implied reader. This marks narrative criticism out from reader
response criticism, which is largely concerned with the real reader. Ultimately
the aim of narrative criticism is to be able to read the text in the way the real
author intended the implied reader to read it. To some extent this means
unlearning, for example, what one knows from the other gospels; or, in the
other direction, acquiring knowledge that the evangelists take for granted - the
nature of Jewish festivals perhaps. Whilst the notion of an implied reader
remains a concept rather than a reality, it nevertheless allows an opportunity
to examine the text according to certain valuable criteria.

Narrative criticism is distinctive for four reasons. Firstly, it shares with

structuralism a text-centred approach, but it differs in that it prefers to examine
the linear, rather than deep, relationships, of the story. Secondly, it shares with
rhetorical criticism an interest in the effect of a text upon a reader. Yet the
former is more grounded in the text, because the latter is geared more to
looking at the external audience. Thirdly, it places the reader firmly in the text
as the implied reader, whilst reader response methods assume the reader is
external to the text, creating meaning through a dominant or equal relationship
with iL Fourthly, its boundaries are not watertight, and it can be flexible
enough at times to be indistinguishable from some forms of reader response
criticism.
It is because narrative criticism is concerned with the implied
reader, rather than with one particular historical setting only, that it is
appropriate to discuss the potential uses of this discipline on a Gospel which
is so geared to inspiring a vibrant and active response from its readership,
'that you may believe'.

4. Narrative Criticism in Detail23

A narrative, defined as a work of literature that tells a story, has two

aspects. Firstly, its content, the 'what', the story , which consists of a number

23 See Powell. NarratiyeCriticism?. chs.3 - 6.

 22
Of elements interacting to make up the plot, namely events, characters , and
settings. Secondly, its rhetoric, the 'how', the discourse, the methods of telling
the story. One story can be told in several different ways, e.g. Jesus' life. There
are four main aspects to discourse, which I shall discuss first.

(a) The Workings of Narrative : Discourse

i] Point of view : The implied author places the story in the context of his worid
view, with all its values and assumptions. The implied reader must accept
these for the period of reading, otherwise there can be no engagement with
the text. For example, John's gospel is written from the point of view of one
familiar with first century Palestine.
11} Narration : The implied author uses a voice to tell the story. Implicitly the
author asks the trust of the implied reader, for the time being. The author has
at hand a variety of techniques to encourage the implied reader's dependence
- hinting that he knows far more than he tells, as John does, and sharing
opinions on the reliability or not of others. Some narrators never appear in the
story, whilst some, like John, sometimes appear with a 'we', personally
addressing the implied reader.
iii] Symbolism and Irony : These are chief amongst the ways in which an
implied author helps the reader to pick and choose amongst a variety of
opinions, and to finally concur with the author. Frequently in the Fourth Gospel
Christ or the narrator have to resort to correcting false opinions; or phrases
pregnant with meaning like 'living waters' are left hanging and unexplained,
so as to excite further interest. All literary devices have their home in the
relationship between the implied author and implied reader. The panoply of
such devices pushes the reader in a certain direction, even if an exact
meaning cannot be pinned down. The use of irony especially leads the
reader to be wary of treating words and actions at face value, and to seek out
further hidden meanings. Together with symbolism, the use of irony gives the
reader a sense of uncertainty, and a need to read and re-read, to try to get
deeper into the text.
iv] Narrative Patterns: The tricks of the author's trade are known as 'narrative
patterns'. They are utilised to help to structure and convey the story, and a
study of them reveals the author's priorities. There are a number of lists of
such patterns, but the list commended by Powell is as follows 24 : repetition.

24 Powell, NarrativeCriticism?. p. 32 - 33.

 23
contrast, comparison, causation and substantiation, climax, pivot,
particularisation and generalisation, statements of purpose, preparation,
summarisation, interrogation, inclusio, interchange, chiasm, and intercalation.
When, where, why and how often they are used has a great effect on the
reader. Chiastic patterns have been the subject of much interest in Johannine
studies.

(b)The Workings of Narrative : Story

Events, characters and settings are together the constituent parts of a
story, and the plot arises from the interaction between them.
1) Events
An 'event' is a wide category, which does not just refer to
physical actions, but also to sayings, thoughts and feelings.
(i) There is a hierarchy of importance amongst all the
events of story, and some of them are crucial to its development, and others
add something which does not make much difference. These are known
respectively as kernels and satellites. Studies of the structure of this gospel
would show an event like the wedding feast at Cana to be a kernel ; the
woman caught in adultery episode would be a satellite. In contrast, historical
criticism would place this episode outside the gospel as unoriginal.
(ii) Order : There are two sets of time in a narrative. One
form of time is discourse time, that is the order in which the narrator relates
events. The other form is story time, which is the original order of events in the
story as a whole, and may well not be the same as the order in which they are
related. When there are discrepancies between the two kinds of time, we have
what are called anachronies. These are themselves divided into two main
groups; analepses and prolepses. Analepses refer to events which are
narrated belatedly, and prolepses to events which are narrated prematurely. If
the eartier or later is within the bounds of the story, it is an internal anachrony;
if it occurs before or after the story time, it is an external anachrony.
(ill) Duration: The length of narrative devoted to reporting
an event is often quite different to the length of real time in which the event
occurred. The narrator has a number of devices available to accelerate or
decelerate the speed of the narrative, and these accentuate or play down
some features. A long process may be summarised in a moment; a scene may
be reported word for word; a moment in a stream of consciousness can be
dealt with at great length. Contrast, for instance, the amount of space given
 24
over to the farewell discourse in relation to the other three years of Christ's
ministry.
(iv) Frequency: Usually an event is reported once , but it
may be reported once or several times. Obviously the more use of repetition
the more significant the event is.
(v) Causation ; Narrative criticism concentrates on the
connections between parts of a narrative , and therefore on elements of
causality which relate one event to another. These connections can be
contingent, or probable or possible. Historical criticism looks at the thematic or
sequential relationships, but not at the deeper workings of the story.
(vi) Conflict: The human mind searches for order and
resolution, for structure and (happy) endings, and whatever obstructs these in
a narrative is significant. Conflict most influences characterisation - a
character can be in conflict with himself, or with other characters, or with some
larger force, like nature or society or destiny. Conflict generates excitement,
energy and intensity, and is felt in its intensity by the reader. The Fourth
Gospel is driven by the conflict between Jesus and the world.

2) Characters
Characters, whether individuals or groups, carry out the activities of the
plot. They have particular roles, but often exceed in interest the main purpose
for which they have been put there. Authors tell their readers about the
characters either directly, telling the reader explicitly about their reputation or
characteristics, or indirectly, showing their characters' nature through their
speeches, actions thoughts, values and interactions with others. How the
narrator himself relates to the characters, showing who he approves or
disapproves of is done through his indication of the values and worid views of
the participants, and explicit or implicit comparison with others. Many literary
critics quote E. M. Forster's famous distinction between flat characters and
round characters. The former are very predictable, the latter more interesting
because they can possess a variety of traits which may come into conflict. With
regard to the gospels, being such brief narratives, perhaps the labels 'static'
and 'dynamic' are most appropriate, for they apply to the development or
otherwise of a character's main traits over the course of the narrative. Most of
all, the use of characters can create for the reader a sense of involvement in
the essentially human experience of the narrative. By giving chances for
 25
sympathy or antipathy to be felt towards certain characters, the narrator can
push the reader along a certain direction. Empathy is the most powerful
emotion the narrator can stir up, empathy for the realities of life faced by
characters in the narrative, and empathy for the highest ideals when they tune
in with the reader's ideals.

3). Settings
Settings are the theatre stages of the narrative. They can function in
several different ways: they may provide some of the structure of the story,
influence conflict, contribute to character development, or form part of the
symbolic structure.
(a) Spatial settings. Both the 'props' and the 'back cloths' of a
setting's space are material to this sphere of interest. The use of contrast - city
versus country, plain versus mountain, sea versus land - is very common. By
extension, the crossing of physical boundaries can be made to bear further
meanings. The brevity of the gospel narratives can be seen in the sparseness
of detail and of evocation of atmosphere in the description of settings. Perhaps
rather in the spirit of much modern theatre, the spartan detail contributes
towards the reader's freedom to experience the setting in a variety of ways,
and appropriate its meaning accordingly.
(b) Temporal settings : (i) Chronological time, when, used in the
locative sense, this refers to an event transpiring at a particular time , whether
a briefer or a longer event; and when used in the durative sense, this refers to
an interval of time, rather than a particular date.
(ii) Typological time, which refers to
the nature of the time in which something occurs regulariy and repeatedly.
Day or night, winter or summer, Sabbath or weekday, are all common types of
time in the gospels. The religious calendar is an obvious example of this.
Furthermore, it is possible to distinguish , as Ricoeur has done,
between mortal time and monumental time.25 The categories listed are all
contained within the notion of 'mortal time', as measured by people both real
and fictional. Monumental time is the universe's time, and is beyond
measurement and the course of human history.

(c) Social settings : This is another broad category,

25 Quoted in Powell, Narrative Criticism', p.73-4.

 26
encompassing the nature of economy, class, social customs, politics and the
wider cultural setting of a narrative. This may sound close to historical critical
interests, but where it differs is that the information is absorbed by narrative
critical scholars to aid understanding of the story, rather than the practice of
historical critical scholars, which is to extract elements from the story in order
to build up a picture of what events took place in real life.

5.Narrative Criticism. Faith and Revelation

The nature of narrative criticism needs to be put within the wider setting
of biblical hermeneutics. Because the science of hermeneutics is precisely
about the nature of the relationship between text and reader, there are cleariy
questions of epistemology involved. What can I know? How can I know it ? Is
knowledge an achievement or a process? Can it be parcelled up and handed
over, or must it be experienced? What connections are there between the
ways of knowing which God granted to the human beings he made, and the
effect of the revelation and redemption on how they can know God, and what
they can find in God?
Christian teaching has always been that there is room for the Holy
Spirit to work between text and reader. In doctrinal terms, the revelation
continues, there is a continual revealing, and it is not a finished item. Since
also a text can give a variety of meanings, there is space for an understanding
of the variety of effects of scripture upon a reader, and of the variety of
potential responses. Furthermore, if as I said in the Introduction, Christian faith
and knowing are essentially personal and relational in character, one may
wish to make connections between the human character of stories, and the
manner in which we appropriate any information and ideas which has a
transformative effect on our lives. It may well be that the most fundamental
thought processes of perceiving and conceiving are intimately linked with the
shape of stories. The manner in which we conceive of ourselves and of our
worid seems to be most profoundly formed and reformed by stories, whatever
their degree of life-likeness. In taking time out from our life to look at it from a
different point of view, we may well return changed in a way that argument
based on theory, principle and evidence could not have achieved to the same
degree. When Biblical stories are respected for their narrative form, they are
found to have within them a message - or messages - which cannot be
contained within any particular doctrinal form, and therefore an individual
personal response to them is drawn out.
 27
Finally, narrative criticism is ultimately dependent on a hermeneutics
that claims that meaning does not reside in a text, but has a potential there for
meaning which awaits realisation when the reader engages with the text.
Narrative criticism sees meaning coming through the story, and this meaning
is constant, not time-bound. The notion that the poetic function of a narrative
surpasses its historical and referential function is something that has been
recognised for some time.26 But only now has narrative criticism put that on a
firm critical footing.

John's theology of the creative word acting as the judge between light
and darkness is a suitable metaphor for the power of the Gospel text. The all-
creating, all-knowing Logos, continues to operate as word, through John's
speech, and through the text. The light shines in the darkness, into the mind of
the reader. We think we examine the text, but in the end the text effectively
examines us. John (though un-named) assures us of his veracity, 'we know',
but the worid cannot contain the truth, 'all the books that could be written'.
Christ divides the seekers from the blind, and draws out from Pilate, "What is
truth?" The irony is that Pilate does not realise who is really on trial, nor who is
really confronting him, nor that he is asking the basic question of Jesus' life
and John's story. Jesus stands before Pilate as the text stands before us ; he
and it being there not to be analysed, not for a dialogue between two equal
partners, but as a question mark, which is instead analysing us.
Hermeneutical treatments of John demonstrate common areas of
interest with narrative criticism. 27 Taking their cue from such philosophers as
Gadamer and Ricoeur, they suggest that understanding is the fundamental
mode of human being. To be human is to understand, and so understanding
is the primary form of our ontology. When it comes to the interpretation of
texts, understanding, in its fullest sense, involves the 'fusion of horizons', in
which aesthetic surrender and existential interpretation play their part.
Appreciation and appropriation both have a role. The achievement of the
fusion is done by what Polanyi would call the 'hunch'.

26 Luther indeed saw three stages to revelation ; firstly, as an historical event, secondly, as the
public proclamation of that event through the Bible, and thirdly as the moment in which that
message is received and understood by its hearers. Quoted in Powell, Narrative Criticism?
p,99.

27 See, e.g. S.Schneiders, The Revelatory Text: Interpreting the New Testament as Sacred
Scripture, (1991).
 28
6.The Development of Literary Criticism on John's Gospel

The recent development of literary criticism as a discipline in its own

right does not entail that only now are people looking at the Gospel for the first
time as a literary piece of work. Stibbe gives a list of some eariier twentieth
century approaches to John as literature. 28 Some of these eariier writers were
clearly aware of the text not just as a literary work but also as a dramatic text,
and they showed sensitivity to its literary features in a way which was not at
first fashionable. There are now two leading authors on the subject of literary
criticism applied to John's Gospel. One is the American scholar Alan
Culpepper, the other one is the British Mark Stibbe. I wish to explore at more
length the work of these two writers as case studies in literary critical work on
John.

(i) The Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel by Alan Culpepper

This work was the first major explosion into the worid of
Johannine scholarship of literary criticism. Published 12 years ago, it still
serves as the main text for this line of enquiry. Apart from the occasional
monograph or specialised piece very little had been done to apply the new
methods of literary criticism to the gospel, and he was the first to do so
systematically.29 He organised his areas of investigation into the following
categories : narrator and point of view, narrative time, plot, characterisation,
implicit commentary, and the implied reader.
Culpepper explored how the author used his life and
experiences, his imagination and reflections to recreate the story of Jesus in
such a way that its first hearers could enter into the worid he had known.
Taking the role of the narrator of the story, the implied reader guides his
readers with occasional interventions and frequent judgments, thus inclining
the reader to trust his point of view. Most importantly, he shapes much of the
reader's response to the central character, Jesus, partly through such
comments, partly through his display of omniscience over Jesus' origins and
destiny, and also through his use of characters whose colours he paints
largely by the nature of their response to Jesus. One character, and one
character only, ( apart from Jesus) is portrayed in entirely favourable terms,
and that is the Beloved Disciple, who incarnates the example of true faith.
28 M. Stibbe, John as Storyteller. (1992), p.9.

29 M.Stibbe, John's Gospel. (1994) p. 1-2.

 29
The key to understanding the Fourth Gospel's fundamental unity
and coherence, argues Culpepper, is its manner of developing a few central
ideas. Like the other gospels, it has a somewhat episodic plot development in
the sense of one scene constantly shifting to another. The cumulative impact
of the plot is shown by experience over two thousand years to be persuasive
enough to encourage readers to embrace John's vision of reality. Not that the
Gospel is a mere meditation on faith - it is firmly constructed so as to gain
credibility through its use of religious tradition, eyewitness testimony,
authentication (by the beloved disciple) and multiple historical and
geographical details. The main theme, the true identity of Jesus, is one where
John may have wanted to defend himself because his Jesus is so different
from the Synoptics. Culpepper's work is at its sharpest in its grasp of the
dynamics of John's plot. His outlining of the workings of sequence, causality,
unity and affective power show how the plot develops as Jesus' identity
simultaneously comes to be recognised or misunderstood. Like a mystery
story the plot thickens and gains suspense as successive characters accept or
reject him. Interestingly, Culpepper shows that the intended audience, the
implied readers, must have been a group of believers, because the implied
reader is expected to be familiar with most of the characters and events, as
well as with the generalities of Jewish festivals, though not with specific
details about other aspects of life or places in ancient Israel. The central thrust
of the Gospel is to distinguish between true and false faith in Jesus, to spur the
readers to make their own decision.

Before dealing with the weaknesses of Culpepper's approach, I shall

briefly outline a couple of major studies which are based on Culpepper's
ideas. One, Irony in the Fourth Gospel by Paul D. Dukeso develops an
understanding of irony as a Hellenistic technique utilised by John to treat
primarily Jewish areas of concern. As irony highlights the distinction between
superticial and deeper areas of understanding, it facilitates a truer grasp of
Jesus. John's use of irony is primarily christological in function, because it
forces the readers to think on different levels, and to examine the perhaps un-
thought out assumptions and knowledge on which they base what they think
they know. Under the heading of irony can be included metaphors, double
meanings and misunderstandings, as well as ironic speech itself, all of which
are well represented in this Gospel. I shall be giving plenty of examples of
irony in the three case study chapters later. Of equal note is the value of irony

30 Paul D. Dul<e, Irony in the Fourth Gospel, (1985).

 30
in mocking those who claim to understand more than they really do, from
Peter or Pilate to the Jews.
A text is a personal product. Narrative criticism is closest to redaction
criticism amongst the various types of historical criticism. The nature of the
implied author's real concerns can only be derived, when applying narrative
criticism, from the text itself. The primary focus and generative power of those
concerns needs to be given high priority. Gail O'Dayst took up Culpepper's
work and demonstrated that the methods of Christ's revelation was John's
main interest, the how rather than the what. The precise means of telling the
story are heavily loaded with theological implications. Adapting ideas from
Bultmann, O'Day shows how John's Jesus reveals truth whilst the contents of
that truth remain often hard to pin down. One main theological claim that
Jesus is the Son of God, which occurs and reoccurs several different ways by
means of the narrative mode of expression is made throughout the Gospel.
Four years after the first publication of Anatomy, it was reissued with a
new preface.32 Here Culpepper took issue with some of his critics - the details
of which we shall come to when looking at Mark Stibbe's work - and where he
outlined possible future areas of investigation. One area would be the use of
communications models. In terms of philosophical background, Culpepper
acknowledged his heavy dependence on the communications model of
Roman Jakobson, and said some critique of that model would certainly be in
order, so as to have an appreciation for how John's narrative relates to other
narratives, and how in its very attempt to be distinctive it is most in dialogue
with the other gospels. Another issue is the role of the narrator. Building on
Culpepper's work, Jeffrey Staley had portrayed the author of the gospel as an
astute narrator intent on a strategy of reader entrapment. 33 Whereas
Culpepper sees the literary devices as helpful aids for the reader, Staley
regards them as negative and sometimes self-contradictory. Rejecting
Staley's approach, Culpepper nevertheless urged the need for further study
on the arbitrary and rhetorical workings of the Gospel. There is, too, scope for
deepening an understanding of time in the fourth gospel, suggests Culpepper,
by looking at the significance of the distinction between Christ's own time, his
'hour', and the time of the Jewish festivals. Several future directions for looking

31 G. O' Day, Revelation in the Fourth Gospel. (1986).

32 Culpepper, Anatomy. (1987 edn.) p. ix-xii.

33J.L Stalev. The Print's First Kiss. (1988).

 31
at plot were suggested by Culpepper, amongst them the study of the
rhetorical effects of an episodic plot, and of the handling of revelation and
concealment. Indeed, the latter has been partially covered by Norman
Petersen's more recent book34, to which I shall return later. Anatomy
concentrated on a set of particular misunderstandings, rather than on the
general role of misunderstanding as a part of implicit commentary, and he
wishes to see that developed also. Moreover, whilst irony and other devices
have been examined well, there is still a large gap in the study of the
symbolism in the Fourth Gospel. His exploration of the topic of the implied
reader was only a tentative first effort, and the questions now to ask are : what
is the relationship between characterisation, the issues and tensions in the
story, and the definition of the implied reader, and how does this gospel
evolve and interact with this reader as it unfolds chapter by chapter? Lastly, on
a more general level. Culpepper points out that there is still a long way to go
in engaging with the issue of the balance between art and history in the text.

(ii)The Work of Mark Stibbe

This scholar is fast becoming the most prolific Johannine literary
critic. He has issued a series of monographs and articles since the eariy
1990s. In order of publication, first came John as Storvteller.35 Stibbe's
doctoral thesis, which in its first part treats the theory and practice of applying
practical, genre, social, and narrative historical methods to John's gospel, and
then in its second part looking at these in relation to chapters 18-19 in detail.
Next came John: Readings. A New Biblical Commentary ,36 the first ever
narrative critical commentary to cover the whole Gospel. He analyses each
chapter according to context, structure, form, plot type, plot, time, narrator,
reader, characteristics, literary devices, and other implicit commentary,
especially irony. Next came an anthology of literary perspectives on John,37 a
useful collection of pieces from before and after the birth of modern biblical
literary criticism. Most recent is John's Gospel .38 in which he updates some of

34 N.R. Petersen. The Gospel of John and the Sociology of Light, (1993).

35 Stibbe, Storyteller. (1992).

36stibbe. John. Readings: A New Biblical Commentary, (1993).

37M. Stibbe, The Gospel of John as Literature : An Anthology of Twentieth Century

Perspectives, (1993).
38stibbe. John's Gospel, (1994).
 32
his eartier work, and produces five main chapters : a reader-response
treatment of Jesus' characterisation as the hero; a structuralist analysis of
John's plot, adopting the terminology of A.J. Greimas; an investigation of the
genre of the gospel using Northrop Frye's analysis of 'mythoi' or 'plot types'; a
narrative critical survey of the style of the gospel concentrating on chapter 11;
and, using one of the newest literary methods, the ethics of reception, he looks
at the use of satire and especially polemic in John.

Stibbe has two main areas of disagreement with Culpepper's work.

Firstly, he like others, criticises Culpepper for depending too much on a type of
literary critical interpretation which originates in the study of the modern novel.
Quite a number of scholars find this an inappropriate method for a first century
narrative. For John, Stibbe and others agree, the worid of ancient Jewish and
Graeco-Roman narratives is the best one from which to draw the relevant
interpretative criteria. Secondly, Stibbe finds fault with Culpepper's ahistorical
approach. After the initial excitement of the literary critical ferment, and the
rush away from historical critical methods, scholars are now settling down to a
less black and white contrast between the two. A story may be primarily a
story, but it may at the same time also be history, and indeed a community
narrative. Narrative criticism need not negate historicity. Culpepper's literary
approach stems from the New Criticism, which looked at the text alone,
regardless of all external data. For instance, a Gospel is written out of a
shared experience for a wider audience, and it adopts the story mode to tell
history. Stibbe has thus given way a little to the idea of a text as a window,
even if its mirroriike qualities still predominate. He bases his work on a wider
and deeper understanding of the historical and sociological functions of
narrative, recognising that communities employ narrative as a device for
enhancing social values and corporate identity; and that narrativity itself is a
phenomenon which gives the shape of story to any narrative, fictional or
historical, and is thus prior to those categories.
John as Storyteller. Stibbe's most weighty book takes seriously the role
of Gospel narrative as a rhetorical phenomenon, which is skilfully deployed to
create a specific kind of theological understanding of Jesus for its readers.
Stibbe tries to identify and evaluate the narrative composition of the Gospel,
especially those elements which constitute a developing story; and to
demonstrate how these narrative qualities are utilised in the service of the
author's particular Christology. Stibbe pursues this interest with reference to
practical criticism, genre criticism, narrative history, and most importantly for
 33
this thesis, with reference to social division, where he uses categories derived
from the sociology of knowledge and the sociology of religion 'in order to show
how in John's narrative Christology must not be read as a closed world but
as an Index of its community's value system and as a functional discourse' 39.
(Though there are questions as to how convincing or verifiable Stibbe's
functionalism is - how far can you read off the needs of the community from the
way the story is told ? ). In chapter 7 Stibbe develops this in his treatment of
John 18-19, demonstrating how John as storyteller creates an imaginative
framework in a personal, pastoral and psychological way, that gives the
Johannine community a sense of coming home to its true self, and fulfilling its
destiny after such a time of alienation. Stibbe concludes by reiterating his
hope that he has provided, firstly, an integrative hermeneutics which
comments on literary factors without excluding historical, social and
psychological dimensions; and secondly treated fairly the four elements of
literature : the original world of the author, the author, the text and the reader.
He gives emphasis to the role of author, at least insofar as John is a masterful
storyteller. Nevertheless, there is still further work to be done, and Stibbe
suggests that the revelatory function of the narrative form should be a rich
mine for exploration, and especially the question: 'If John's story is revelatory,
then how much of that sense of disclosure is due to John's exploration of the
narrative form?'40

Whatever the current literary stature of the text, John's intention is not to
create a great piece of literature per se. Like any human mind, which can
unconsciously impose order on experience, he may well not have been
aware of all the patterns he was creating or all the devices he was employing.
For that matter, neither does the reader need to comprehend all the patterns,
balance and symmetry in the text in order to appreciate their effect. All of the
techniques available to John were and are available to other narrators, and so
they are not unique. John's style comes from a mixture of his own creative
talent, from tradition, and from his cultural surroundings.
Since narrative criticism approaches the writer's thought through the
medium of story, it offers a promising method of combining a conceptual and a
literary analysis of John's main theme. Further investigation is needed to see
how suitable the categories of narrative criticism are for teasing out the
subtleties of the persons and patterns of faith in this gospel. The theme does

39 ibid.

40 StIbbe.Storvteller, p. 199.
 34
not directly drive the plot but acts as a constant commentary on ttie action.
Also, whilst we should appreciate the story as a whole, it is only possible to
discover what John means by faith by looking at individual episodes and by
analysing the smaller scenes as well as the sweep of the larger narrative.

7. Literary Criticism and the Johannine Community

It is easy to slip into quite individualistic terminology when discussing
issues of believing and knowing. However, the Gospel of John does not offer
a privatised religion; it offers the experience of a truth-seeking journey, along a
road peopled with the presence of other seekers, past and present and future.
At the Last Supper, Jesus patiently teaches the disciples about the
relationships which they have not yet perceived. He seeks to build up an
abiding community of faith which will survive his bodily departure and yet
extend his glory. Jesus tells them that they are seeing and knowing the Father
in him. However, he has had to begin by exposing their ignorance and their
fears. Several times a single disciple replies to Jesus in the first person plural
(e.g. 14.5,8 ), suggesting the communitarian nature of the truth-seeking
process. Jesus, though, tends to reply to the disciple using the singular 'you',
indicating the continued need for personal experience of the truth. The
interplay between personal and communal aspects of truth-seeking can also
be seen in Mary Magdalene's behaviour at the empty tomb in chapter 20. Her
first reaction, as far as she is a representative character, is to speak for herself
and her community. "They have taken away the Lord from the tomb, and we do
not know where they put him". With a very human mixture of faith and doubt
she addresses the gardener, discovers that he is her Lord, shows her
commitment and faith, but simultaneously, rather than celebrating a victory
over death, she laments a missing body. But a few verses later (20.13), she is
no longer speaking in the plural. Her response to the two angels replaces '1he
Lord" with "My Lord", and "we have not known" with "I have not known".
Ironically, she is feeling alone in a situation which was intended to assure her
of the knowledge that she would never be alone again. The strength of the
community's faith does not guarantee the strength of the individual's faith, and
there is room for personal appropriation. Jesus' words - as in chapter 16 - will
only really make sense in the light of experience, and that experience will
involve both mutual love strengthened by joy and persecution, and moments
of isolation on the journey of faith.
 35
The way in which the promise of the Holy Spirit is introduced in the
Farewell Discourses highlights an essential feature of post-resurrection faith
and knowledge. Jesus promises a new paraclete, and indeed in some sense
his own renewed presence. The world will not have these sightings, but the
disciples will 'know' the paraclete and 'see' Jesus. As he shifts from the
paraclete to himself, there is also a shift in the temporal aspects of faith. The
disciples know the paraclete, and have him now, but Jesus they "will see". For
the first time (of only three times) John uses the expression 'in that day'
(14.20). In the Old Testament, the term is used many times for the moment of
God's powerful actions, for better or worse, in Israel. In this gospel it carries the
meaning of the moment of the definitive understanding of Jesus' life and
message, when "you will know that I am in my Father and you in me and I in
you". At this point Jesus for the first time reveals to the disciples that their
relationship to him is intimately connected with that of Jesus with his Father.
This assurance is given collectively, not individually. Jesus is 'in' the
Johannine community. Both in their true nature, and in their daily lives, those
who believe in Jesus are empowered to do what Jesus does and be where
Jesus is. All the statements in this key passage, 14:15-20, are addressed to a
collective 'you'.

The "you" so addressed is / are a social and political community. There

are strong political and social aspects to the community nature of this gospel.
There are a large number of widely varying sociological analyses of John
available, which cannot be covered comprehensively here. But the
connections between the search for truth and a believer's place in the world
have been well explored by David Rensberger, in his book. Overcoming the
World : Politics and Community in the Gospel of John. 4i Recognising that
John was written in an atmosphere of conflict and persecution, with ail the
stresses of loyalty to one social group in a complex struggle, Rensberger
maintains that John refuses to restrict that struggle to one geographical,
historical and social setting, but links it to the fundamental areas of how God is
involved in the world, and how humans respond to God, and to one another.
He explores the interconnections of spiritual and political redemption and
liberation, and there is much in his work which is relevant to understanding the
historical and eternal aspects of the search for truth. Beginning with an
elaboration of the various sociological definitions of a sect, he shows how the
Johannine community can be shown to be characterised as a sect. Amongst
41 D. Rensberger, Overcoming the World : Politics and Community in the Gospel of John.
(1989).
 36
its most prominent sectarian characteristics, are its rejection of the 'world', a
claim to a unique or special truth, voluntary membership based on special
religious experience or knowledge, and the vitality of love and mutual
acceptance within the group. The extremity of the persecution they suffered
meant that 'Jesus became the centre of their new cosmos, the locus of all
sacred things'.42 Thus the theology, and epistemology, of the gospel have
radically political dimensions.

Rensberger outlines, as one of his case-studies, how chapter 3

illustrates Jesus' - and John's - response to those people on the edge of the
Johannine community, the secret believers, and the disciples of John the
Baptist. Both of them are called to break with their past. Nicodemus, would
then have a double role - as the exemplar of one on an inner journey towards
Christ, as well as the representative of his communities; of the Pharisees, and
of those who believe securely. To tell the truth is to live dangerously, and to
risk death. There is no such thing as an apolitical epistemology or belief
system. Somewhere there will be truth-claims and power groupings in conflict.
John's gospel reflects the division between those who recognise the
truth and those who reject it. It is only by knowing the truth that the world can
be set free from its sin. Jesus liberates by speaking and embodying truth. This
truth Is the reality of God, and of God's claim upon the world. Loyalty to God
through Jesus subverts the activities of the world. John's Christology is the
fundamental truth of John's Christianity, its foundational vision, in which the
reader's understanding of God, themselves and others was grounded. One of
the first steps In liberation is the liberation of consciousness, the removal of the
oppressor's claim to right and authority over the lives of the oppressed, and
the opening up of new possibilities. Once people have been made aware of
an alternative order, they can be made free to imagine their own future. Jesus
practises his authority by ceaselessly increasing people's awareness, and
undermining any of their commitments to the false truths of this world. So any
matters connected with truth, with faith, with knowledge, will always be
intimately connected with doing, with practicalities and politics. The believing
and the knowing in the Fourth Gospel do not operate in a political vacuum. A
literary critical treatment is well placed to draw out these resonances within
the text.

42 Rensbenger, Overcoming.p.28.
 37

8. From Theory to Practice

The three characters I have selected are: Nicodemus, the
Samaritan woman, and the blind man. Every one of them has a conversation
with Jesus which dwells in some way or other on the nature of true belief, the
recognition of the truth, and the consequences of belief. These three episodes
are rich with thematic connections with other parts of the gospel, its plot,
themes and personalities. However, I do not wish to lose sight of how John is
one coherent, progressively developing story. There are overarching patterns
in the narrative as a whole, and I shall look for their expression in each
discrete episode. Each shorter narrative makes its own point, whilst remaining
In harmony with the whole.The next stage Is to move to using three characters
to explore the subject matter of knowing and believing, and to see how
narrative criticism helps in this process. From a survey of these encounters I
hope to draw the outlines of some conclusions about the nature of Johannine
belief, using the insights of Polanyi, and revealed through narrative criticism.
 38
Chapter Three
NIcodemus the Pharisee

Contents

1. Introduction
2. Literary Criticism and Nicodemus
3. Nicodemus, Time and Understanding
4. Nicodemus as a Contrast to Other Characters
5. Conclusion

1 .Introduction

Having looked at the theoretical considerations of literary criticism, and

its general application to John in practice, it would be helpful to clarify my
ways of approaching these issues before trying to pin down the role of the first
character I shall look at in detail : Nicodemus. This is the first detailed
conversation of Jesus' in the gospel. It is also his most high profile encounter
with a member of the Jewish establishment This is a chance for Jesus to
proclaim the truth he teaches to a representative of the Jewish faith whilst at
the same time moving beyond the bounds of that faith. What is said , and how
it is said, implicitly or explicitly, is of the greatest importance here. In the last
chapter I quoted Stibbe's remark, to the effect that, if people experience the
gospel as a revelatory story, how far can that be attributed to John's skilful use
of the narrative form? To frame the question in the sphere of faith responses
and characterisation, if the reading of the Nicodemus element in the story tells
us something, then how far is that due to John's skilful use of characterisation
and / or other literary devices? So compressed is this narrative, that it is often
difficult to disentangle the themes and devices , and to work out how much
weight is borne by any one technique. Furthermore, if we use the phrase 'faith
response' to serve as a catch-all for any instances of characters coming to
faith in the gospel, how far can we expect to see details of, or indeed any,
progression in those characters who appear so infrequently, or even only
once?

Given that the density of this narrative and the elusiveness of the main
theme are welded together in John's story, any treatment of any episode,
 39
character or setting must surely be kaleidoscopic In its approach. On one
level, our expectations of characterisation in John - as set out in chapters 1
and 2 - may be as follows : Each character will have a message for us. Most
will be involved in a faith quest in some way or other, will enter the fray, and in
the heat of the conflict, their true nature and their capacity for belief or unbelief
will become apparent Each one will find something revealed for himself,
whether or not he accepts it. Each will be confronted by an aspect of Jesus
that can enrich both the character's and the reader's understanding of Christ.

For those who accept Culpepper's analysis of the plot, the challenge is
to isolate how a story whose main character is said to be static, and whose
attendant characters are largely foils, can reveal anything, when that main
character Is as elusive as Stibbe suggests. How can those minor characters,
who, according to some literary critics, exist only to complement the chief
protagonist, and to search, for him often vainly, possibly imprint themselves
on the reader's consciousness as convincing flesh and blood characters?
Every character is in the shadow of Jesus Christ, and John must draw them
out of the shadows and engender the feeling of a genuine encounter.
Remembering the existentialist theology that says, rather hyperbolically, that
Christ reveals nothing except that he is the Revealer, what sort of content can
we expect in these encounters? Might perhaps the author reveal less in the
way of content and more in the way of the faith experience itself? If Jesus
speaks of what he has seen without giving the details, and yet still draws
people of faith towards him, could John entice the reader to faith in a similar
manner? Might it be expected, then that each character will not increase our
knowledge of the content of faith, but will deepen our awareness of the varied
approaches to faith, so that each character becomes a way to the Way, the
Truth and the Life? A deep irony is that the characters, of course, have their
origin in the Logos ( as do all people, as the Prologue tells us ). What sort of
pattern of faith development does this imply? Could it be that the encounter for
some will then be about grasping the meaning of what we already know,
rather than acquiring knowledge? On the other hand the motif of
misunderstanding suggests many will be unable to find and know, as it were,
the place of their origins. That may well be the key to the kind of faith
development outlined here. The narrator must utilise the humanity of the minor
characters in the same way that he utilises the humanity of Jesus. This is, after
all, often considered the most personal of the gospels in its characterisation of
 40
Christ, as well as of the full range of characters. Taking further what we have
said about the mirrortike qualities of the text, we can reflect on whether
characterisation might be expected to be the chief burden bearer in the role of
making the reader feel a part of the story.

If the foregoing is accepted as a brief glance at the territory to be

covered, the following questions would pin down the concerns to be raised
when examining Nicodemus:
What do we learn about Nicodemus?
What is added to our existing knowledge of Jesus?
How has Nicodemus been used as a foil for Christ's
personality?
Does this episode, a microcosm of the gospel like any other, link
particulariy strongly with any other episodes?
What do we learn from Nicodemus about faith development?
Is this new? How is it developed elsewhere in the Gospel?
How does Nicodemus contrast with other characters?

2. Literary Criticism and Nicodemus

(1 )The Literary Critics
Usually, Nicodemus is seen as a representative of those leading Jews
who cannot come to full faith in Jesus. His horizons are limited to earthly
realities, and Jesus does not fit into his categories. His knowledge of scripture
is impeccable, yet his understanding of it is inadequate. The author frequently
uses the device of misunderstanding to draw out the challenge of faith, and
Nicodemus has been seen as the embodiment of misunderstanding.
Nicodemus has enough belief to trust Jesus' signs, but not to move on from
there. So what difference does literary criticism make? What follows is a
synopsis of various literary critical treatments of Nicodemus, pointing out their
main insights, and then a critique on their conclusions about Nicodemus' role.
To what extent does Nicodemus become a full believer? Culpepper's
brief treatment of Nicodemus leads him to conclude that Nicodemus is not far
from the kingdom of God, but he remains outside. Although he at first seems
to be a mere representative of those who had believed only on the basis of
Jesus' signs, he quickly develops a more well-defined personality. But there
have been various comments that will prejudice the reader against trusting
Nicodemus, for the reader has seen and does see more than Nicodemus.
Unable to fit Jesus into his own prior assumptions about the Messiah,
 41
Nicodemus is on the brink of faith, but unable to make the transition. In terms
of the affective power of this episode, 'there is the pathos of age meeting
youth, established religion meeting an emerging pneumatic movement,
tradition confronting freedom'.43

The mention of the creation of the individual, the means of earthly and
heavenly birth, takes us back to the creation spoken of in the prologue. The
lucid exegesis by Servotte notes the connection between verses 11- 21 of
chapter 3 and the prologue.44 Although there is debate as to whose words
these are, and whether Nicodemus Is still present to hear them, at least it
does seem that the Nicodemus episode has rendered this confession of faith
possible, and this is directly related to it. Servotte's most perceptive comment,
though occurs in his appendix on the structure of the story, the indications of
time, and the narrative point of view. His analysis of this reveals
'the co-existence within the Gospel of two attitudes to time. On the
one hand, there is an awareness of the historical situation and also the
progression of faith, but on the other hand, there is also the certainty
of an eternal truth which is always present. That has deep
repercussions on our understanding of the Gospel, for it can lead to
two readings. One could , for example, read the story of Nicodemus as
one of the stages in Christ's self-revelation: but one could also read it
as a typical instance of the relation between man and Christ. The
historical reading, which locates this moment in time, offers one
interpretation, the typological one another. They need not be
mutually exclusive'.

So perhaps we need to analyse each character not just in terms of events,

time and plot, but also in terms of the historical encounter with Jesus and the
universal encounter with the Christ. What connection is there between the
particular historical acts of faith and trust in Jesus as recorded in the Gospel,
and the demands and experience of faith for those who have never met the
saviour in the flesh?
The narrator's reticence about Nicodemus has led some to see
this dialogue, and indeed Nicodemus' role, as a study In incomprehension. In
his commentary , Stibbe shows how very dense in chapter 3 are the many
themes mentioned. He counts fourteen (listed in more detail in this chapter in

43 Culpepper, Anatomy, p. 135.

44 H. Servotte. According to John. London, 1994.

45 Servotte, John, p. 104. {See the comments on X. Leon-Dufour's article later in this chapter)
 42
section 2 ).46 The character of Jesus, against whom the character of
Nicodemus is defined, is shown as the :
'reveaier of heaven's secrets... he discloses truth about the
elusiveness of the Spirit by comparing the Spirit with the desert wind.
He indirectly communicates the fact that he has unrestricted access to
and from heaven, and that he is the Son of Man, the one whose lifting
up will give eternal life to all those who behold him in faith. In speaking
of these things, however, Jesus proves to be the elusive Christ, a
concealing reveaier. He speaks in puns, double entendres and
metaphors which require more than a modicum of wit to interpret. He
also uses discontinuous dialogue by transcending the level of
discourse used by his questioner'.47

Against this Nicodemus is the embodiment of misunderstanding. John's use

of literary devices is particularly well demonstrated in this chapter. There are
puns, like spirit / wind and lift up / sacrifice. There is double entendre,
especially with 'again' / 'from above'. Most of all, there is parody, in which
Nicodemus' pretensions to power and knowledge are skilfully utilised by
Jesus to mock Nicodemus' failure to believe. The echoes with the prologue in
3:16-21, the section sometimes called John's kerygma, provide the focus for
the characterisation of God, whose prime characteristic here is a self-giving
love expressed in action, given to the worid despite its hostility. Whilst
Nicodemus' incomprehension sounds a warning note. God's love and
generosity are reiterated. The choice is plain, the consequences are clear,
and the invitation to the light always open.
In regard to 7: 45-52 Stibbe notes that, as the conflict increases in
intensity, the pace of the narrative slows down.48 Nicodemus only ever
appears in Jerusalem, and here his reappearance brings echoes from the
preceding verses about the Spirit glorifying Christ, and the water rituals
associated with the feast of tabernacles relate to his own concern with rebirth
in his previous conversation. Whilst his behaviour in this episode shows him
still to be a secretive enquirer, he does not come too badly out out of it. As
Stibbe says, 'the reader is certainly meant to view Nicodemus as the best of a
bad bunch . He is the only character in the chapter (apart from Jesus) who

46 Stibbe. John, p.49-61,

47 stibbe, John, p. 55.

48 stibbe, John .p. 89.

 43
elicits any support from the reader'.49
The effect of Nicodemus' uncertainty may be to move the reader to
seeking certainty. In his synchronic reading of the narrative, Moloney
approaches chapters 1 - 4 as an implied reader would encounter them.so He
notes how Nicodemus makes a favourable impression on the reader by at
least moving from darkness to the light, and how the reader's sympathy for him
is strengthened by his repeated efforts to understand Jesus. Moloney is
particularly good on showing how the traditional understanding of the phrase
'the kingdom of God' is shifted towards the notion of a community of believers
joined through eternal life, into whose companionship one is initiated by a
liminal experience, involving both water and spirit. The events leading to faith
are transcendent, and faith is an entity or experience shared and experienced
with others. The Nicodemus episode as a whole has premonitions of things to
come, for although there have been comments about the conflict between
Jesus and the Jews, the end is still unknown to the implied reader. God's act
of love in sending his Son raises the fundamental question for all people, of
whether or not to accept the revelation. Nicodemus' prevarication forces the
reader to prefer decisiveness. When the time is always the present moment, it
is the response of the believer which is significant, rather than any further
action by the God whose primary action has been to send his Son. Moloney
believes that Nicodemus is used as a model of partial faith, who makes his
own journey into faith, but that is only apparent by chapter 19.
It seems that the data can be read, and will continue to be read, in a
variety of ways. Probably the most penetrating analysis of Nicodemus comes
from Jouette Bassler.si She points out that the data for deciding whether
Nicodemus can be placed on one side or the other of authentic faith can be
read and organised in conflicting ways. The fact that he keeps returning to
Jesus seems to counter-balance his repeated failures to understand. His
defence of Jesus on a legal technicality, which seems a minimal effort on one
level, is at least an act of risk-taking. His respect for the body of Jesus, whilst
perhaps an act of unbelief in the promise of the resurrection, can also be seen
as more courageous than the disciples behind closed doors. Bassler notes the
essential ambiguity in everything connected with Nicodemus, and especially

49 Stibbe, John, p. 94

50 F.J. Molonev. Belief in the Word. (1993), p,104-121.

51 J.Bassier, Mixed Signals; Nicodemus in the Fourth Gospel, JBL, 108/4, 1989, p.635-646.
 44
how this is connected with his oscillation between two spiritual places, that of
unbelief, and that of the encounter with Christ. What is missing is any
conclusive comment in the gospel about Nicodemus, an absence which many
commentators have tried to explain away, rather than leave unresolved.

Using the forms of reader-response criticism developed by Wolfgang

Iser, Bassler suggests that Nicodemus works as a character precisely because
he is ambiguous. 'Since the text provides no definitive closure to the figure,
the reader must bring closure beyond the text, but this is not an easy process.
Nicodemus creates a cognitive 'gap' in the text that the reader must fill, and in
the process of filling this gap, the reader is confronted with some serious
questions'.52 The ambiguity of Nicodemus makes him a more attractive figure
and deepens the nature of his portrayal. Turning to the categories of social
anthropology, Bassler finds it very useful to adapt the category of marginality,
for those who are members of two or more groupings. A marginal character is
one who does not have a certain location or destination, someone hovering
on the point of a transition, with no sign of the conflict being resolved. In
contrast to the disciples who have been reborn, Nicodemus still seems to be
on the margins.
To put it in terms of Polanyian thought, Nicodemus is someone who
finds it troublesome to operate outside the rules of the tradition. He seems to
need the framework of authority, and will not take responsibility for stepping
outside that framework. He prefers to stick to the knowledge that is inherited,
rather than the knowledge that is newly experienced. But even though the
rules are being broken, it seems to him, he is drawn to discover more. By
chapter 11, he is in league with others in the society of explorers seeking the
truth. In his conversation concerning rebirth, he comes close to the issue of
boundary conditions, of the point at which higher level explanations are
needed to explain lower level events. Jesus is urging him to move out into
wider frames of reference. The thought that occurs to him of a man re-entering
his mother's womb is a point at which he is struggling with the fusion of
incompatibles, a point at which Polanyi sees revelation may occur. If he can
let go of his old maps, and make a new one, he will take the risk necessary to
faith.
Taken as a whole, the direction taken by literary critics is one of looking
more closely at the connection between Nicodemus' response to Jesus, and
the readers' responses to Nicodemus' journey of faith. What narrative criticism

52 Bassler, Mixed Signals, p.644.

 45
and some of the other schools of thought are good at doing is isolating the
means by which John evokes Nicodemus' journey taking place, and the
corresponding readers' journey; what they do not do is give us a vocabulary
with which to characterise the nature and stages of that journey. After a close
examination of the texts, I shall look at one of the underlying issues already
raised here : how believing is connected with a sense of living in more than
just historical time.

(2) The Texts

fa) 2:23 - 3. 21

Often the narrator uses passages to serve as the endings of one

episode and the introduction to another episode. This is the status of 2 : 23 -
25. Nicodemus' introduction is the conclusion to the Temple dialogue. A clutch
of words and phrases densely packed together in verses 23 - 25 are set to
trigger the reader's memory in the next section. The incompleteness of a
signs- based faith is signalled by the narrator's mention of the many who
believe only on the basis of signs, and whom Jesus does not consider worthy
of trust. Jesus' complete penetrative insight Into human nature is stressed by
John, for the first time in the gospel, and the next encounter will be the first test
of this explicit remark. Nicodemus' heart and soul and mind will be the first
man in this gospel to come before the revealing light of Christ's presence. The
way in which 'he knew what was in man' in 2: 25 is connected with 'a
man of the Pharisees' in 3: 1 are juxtaposed points to Nicodemus as one of
those whom Jesus knows and does not need witness from. Stibbe points out
that John's technique of using passages to close and open simultaneously is
an integral part of John's realised eschatology, his evocation of the Jesus
whose presence is the final word, and to which response Is required here and
now.53 The dramatic impetus is thus set for a tantalising encounter with one
who has a signs-based faith, and could be on the verge of something more.
The structure of the passage is carefully arranged. The architecture of
the dialogue on truth and insight In w . 1-15 Is arranged in a tripartite
structure. Three questions are followed by three answers . One who is 'a man'
asks the questions, the other answers as 'the Son of Man'. By the device of
Inclusion the vocabulary and thought structures of the passage are closely

53 Stibbe. John . D.53.

 46
intenwoven. Vv. 1 and 2 mention ' a man', 'coming to Jesus', 'by night', 'doing',
and 'God is with him'. Vv. 19-21 echo these with 'men', 'coming to the light',
'darkness', 'doing', 'wrought in God'.

The characterisation of the individual and the group here is consistent

with John's other characterisation of belief and unbelief. John has already
used the phrases about 'coming to Jesus' as a synonym for faith at the end
of chapter 1, during the gathering of the disciples. Nicodemus' initial
appearance in this sense bodes well. But overall there are darker overtones.
Labelled as a Pharisee, as a leader of the Jews, Nicodemus is thus
associated with those groups with whom Christ has already had some conflict.
Nicodemus asserts his role as a group representative by the use of a first
person plural 'we', and also thus gives away the clue to where he finds his
main sense of authority and certainty. Above all, the meeting at night is one
which evokes an atmosphere of darkness and therefore blindness (like, for
instance the movements of Judas at night in chapter 13 ).
Nicodemus' confession of faith is one which shows him up to be
a man of fairly cut-and -dried opinions, who tries to use pre-set categories
whatever he comes across, rather than relate to it as it is, to the fullness and
complexity of whatever presents itself. There is no difference for him in the
way Jesus is from God to the way John the Baptist is from God. He does not
understand the full import of Jesus being 'from God', of 'God being with him',
of a 'birth from above', or the nature of the Spirit. The one who is the teacher of
Israel is at one level an historical representative of his own believing / half-
believing people, as well as being one who is stuck on a certain point in his
faith-quest.
The character of Jesus is further shown to be one who opens up
the nature of the heavenly world, eternal life, by evoking the manner of its
operation. No concrete details are given - but experiences like rebirth in water
or the Spirit, listening to the wind, and so forth are hints and pointers to the life
he speaks of. His unlimited ability to disclose the truth does not manifest itself
as a detailed inventory of the contents of heaven. Jesus' vocabulary, full of
irony, metaphors, puns and double meanings serves to convey the sense of
the unsettling yet alluring nature of the heavenly secrets.
How Jesus is given this role depends on the author's deployment of the
narrator's point of view and of other points of view. As Nicodemus seems to
fade into the background, without even a curtain call, the distinction between
Jesus' voice and the narrator's voice becomes indistinct. Whether w . 16-21
 47
belong to the former or the latter is a matter of much contention in historical-
critical debate. But from a literary point of view, these verses, with their glance
forward towards the passion in v. 16, secure a vantage point for the reader
over the varied events in the course of the gospel, and enable not just a post-
resurrection perspective on Jesus' earthly life, but also move the reader back
into the narrator's embrace, to the one who sees things sub specie aeierniiate.

As he has revealed more about the Spirit, so then Jesus reveals more
about himself, and then In the succeeding verses more is revealed about the
Father. The connection between belief and eternal life is re-emphasised. The
out-pouring of God's love manifests itself in presenting Jesus as the one in
whom to believe, and the Intensity of the love Is that none should perish. In all
other cases in this gospel God's love is for the disciples - this is the only case
where it is for the worid. The passage implies the possibility of belief for all,
whilst hinting at a variety of responses from full acceptance to total rejection.
Truth is something which can be, and should be, done, and doing it brings
people to the light. The opposite of doing the truth is doing evil. These verses,
then, serve to extend John's portraits of God and humanity, and so to
characterise the chief participants In the drama of salvation.
The mood is set by the use of a number of literary devices. The whole
dialogue is coloured by the mild use of parody by Jesus. Jesus continually
adapts Nicodemus' language, and throws it back at him with very different
connotations, which Nicodemus does not grasp. This is most evident in the
claims about the teacher, and true and false claims to knowledge. The most
obvious double meaning is the word anothen which bears variously the
meanings of 'from above', and 'again'. Jesus intends both meanings, but
Nicodemus understands only the latter. There are also puns, like pneuma ,
which can mean wind or spirit, and hypsoo , which at the spiritual level has
overtones of glorification, but at the physical level connotes being hauled up.
Stibbe lists 14 themes which are characteristic of the whole
gospel and which are included in this passage.54 This is an abridged version
of his list:
(i) Coming to Jesus
(II) The conflict of light and darkness
(iii) The difference between false and true claims to knowledge
(iv) the real origins of Jesus
(V) the role of signs in evoking faith

54 Stibbe, John , p.55.

 48
(vi) the place of being born again in the life of a believer
(vii) the importance of seeing God's rule and of testifying to it
(viii) the reference to water, (generally taken to be already
referring to an already existing Christian initiation rite)
(ix) the Spirit , which is predominantly characterised by its
elusiveness
(X) the reference to testimony furthers the courtroom atmosphere
(xi) ascent and descent, mentioned in chapter 1 with reference to
the angels, are now related to the Son of Man himself.
(xii) the lifting up of the Son, looking backward to Moses and
forwards to Calvary
(xiii) eternal life is linked directly with Jesus' mission
(xiv) believing is mentioned as the route to eternal life.

The dialogue on rebirth opens with Nicodemus speaking as a

representative figure, in the first person plural, offering Jesus a witness based
on signs, which Jesus does not fully trusL He gives Nicodemus a straight
challenge, to be born again, or miss out on seeing the reign of God altogether.
The use of double meaning - above / again - forces Nicodemus to think. He
pursues a literalist and individualist interpretation of Jesus' words, enquiring
after the possibilities of physical rebirth for the individual. The double entendre
of pneuma - wind or spirit - further throws Nicodemus off balance. Nicodemus
the representative is issued with the injunction, "You must all be born again",
hinting at the collective nature of the faith-commitment Jesus asks for. The
communal element of discipleship is acutely painful for Nicodemus, who has
come by night, and will continue to act as a secret believer. Jesus says
Nicodemus is astonished - a comment revealing Nicodemus' personal human
reaction as well as his threatened status as a capable teacher of Israel.
Nicodemus had recognised Jesus as a teacher from God, Jesus calls
Nicodemus a teacher of Israel, and it is hard to tell whether this is dismissive
or not.
Echoing the prologue, v. 11 identifies the light with the
Johannine community. "We speak, and to what we have seen we bear
witness, and you all do not receive our witness". Verse 12 makes explicit the
antagonisms already emerging in the struggle between flesh and Spirit.
Rather than a rigid Gnostic dualism, John seems to be hinting at two life
orientations, one content with the surface of life, one reaching deeper.
 49
Vv. 12-21 are linked by stair-step progression, in wliich one
thematic word from one verse is linl<ed witli one word in ttie next verse, which
adds a new thematic word to linl< it with the next verse. The linl< between
heaven and earth established through Jesus in these verses serves to
authenticate Jesus' authority and teaching. That link is reinforced through the
lifting up, because an intertextual reference to the Old Testament would bring
memories of how the lifting up of the serpent on the pole in the time of Moses
brought to an end sin, and made belief possible. The accent is on glory, on
the positive, healing elements of the crucifixion, rather than on the evil of those
who bring it about. So the reader is drawn to the open, freely - given and
voluntary nature of the love of God, in which belief is invited. Belief has life or
death consequences, associating attitudes and actions as the sign of faith for
individuals and groups. Is Nicodemus now on the rack, torn between his
public position and his emerging secret faith?

By the end of chapter 2, the implied reader is already close to

discovering the connections between receiving and believing, that 'relational
quality of true faith', as iVIoloney says.55 The narrative has slowed its pace at
this point, allowing the narrative to address the reader directly, and invite the
reader into his confidence again just before the crucial encounter to follow. All
around there is movement towards Jesus, and the reader is invited to a
privileged overview of the true motivations and results of such movements.
The reader will be attracted initially to Nicodemus, as he moves
from darkness to light, and seeks to question Jesus. Through Nicodemus'
repeated misunderstandings, the reader is led to look out for the signals of
deeper meanings in Jesus' other conversations. Nicodemus' failure to
consider things outside his own knowledge and experience is a warning to the
reader which will frame other characters' encounters and conversations with
the Christ. Verses 18-19 bring the first appearance of the Johannine
expressions krinein and krisis. The Nicodemus episode is concluded with
this call to decision, in the light of God's judgment. According to iVIoloney,
'Neither God nor the Son acts as a judge... Johannine realised eschatology
stresses the importance of the believer, not the sovereign action of God'.56
Nicodemus does not reject Jesus, but at this stage the implied reader is left
with the impression of his incomplete faith.

55 F.J. Moloney, Belief,p. 104.

56 Moloney, Belief, p.119.

 50
(b) 7 : 45 - 52
Nicodemus' second appearance occurs whilst Jesus is in
Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles, after the completion of the Cana - to -
Cana cycle of his journeyings. All the events in chapter 7 take place around
this feast. Throughout this, in all his conversations, Jesus is engaged in both
disclosure and concealment. This tension dominates his time in Jerusalem.
The references to the feasts show how the narrator is slowing down process
time as the conflict increases in intensity, and opposition to Jesus becomes
high-level and public. Since Nicodemus appeared in chapter 2, more than a
year has elapsed. In contrast, chapters 7 - 1 0 cover only a few months. The
ring composition of chapter 7 links the Nicodemus section - v. 45-52 - with w .
1 - 15, in which Jesus' movements in Galilee enable him to elude the
authorities. This ring composition, or inclusio, patterns associated thoughts
and words. Stibbe suggests this patterns/ : in vv.l - 13 Jesus evades the
authorities, and does it again in w.45 - 52; in w . 14 - 24, 25 - 36, and 37 - 44
he participates in three separate dialogues at different stages of the feast.
These verses are connected by several themes ; the search of the Jewish
authorities for Jesus; the mention of Galilee; the theme of deception; and the
use of the phrase, 'believing in him'. The last verses of the chapter echo the
Galilean reference. Stibbe points out that this chapter does not just reinforce
Christ's elusiveness: 'in the present tense of the narrative world, he also
proves elusive in relation to its past and future'.58 Every one of the social
groups appearing in this chapter fails to discover Jesus' past origins. As with
Nicodemus last appearances, we are back to the question of origins. The
major themes of chapter 7 echo those of chapter 3 : believing , knowing,
coming to Jesus, water, the Spirit, sending, truth, signs.
Nicodemus takes his place alongside five different groups in this
chapter - Jesus' brothers, the Jerusalem crowds, the Jews, the Pharisees and
chief priests, and the Temple guards. Nicodemus is here apparently in conflict
with his fellow Pharisees, and their accusations put him on the same side as
Jesus. Nicodemus' conflict with his own kind puts his own misunderstanding
in an altogether different category. It seems to make him much closer to
Jesus. In verse 15, the Jews are questioning Jesus' authority to teach,
showing doubts which Nicodemus did not have in chapter 3. At this point
Nicodemus' characterisation becomes markedly more positive, especially in
57 Stibbe. John . p.90.

58 stibbe. John. D.91.

 51
his defence of the need to observe the proprieties of the law. Even if he does
not openly declare himself for Jesus, the concern for the proper workings of
justice marks him out as one who would give Jesus a fair hearing.

Stibbe's analysis of the plot in terms of Greimas' actantial

analysis shows that an important transition in the plot structure takes place
here.59 The increase in the plots against Jesus serve to redefine the positive
and negative associations of those around him, and Nicodemus emerges as
one of those who, through opposing the Pharisees, comes closer alongside
Jesus. There are many in this chapter who are seeking Jesus, but
Nicodemus is the only one seeking him for reasons of genuine enlightenment.
As the Pharisees take charge of the situation, and put their trust
in the conventional understanding of the tradition of Moses, the narrator draws
us to notice Nicodemus' presence. But the opening description 'one of them'
leaves it very unclear which group he is meant to belong to, whether to the
Pharisees who believe in him, or to the multitudes who are said to accept
Jesus. His advocacy of the proper use of the law does not extend to
questioning the genuine or otherwise underpinnings of the system of law and
order. The balance of Nicodemus' main interests lies in observing the law,
rather than moving beyond to any personal testimony on behalf of Jesus.
Bringing upon himself the sarcasm of the Pharisees, Nicodemus finds himself
condemned again, and for the second time disappears for a time.
Just as 2 : 23 - 25 colours Nicodemus' first appearance, so 7 : 12 - 13
colours his second appearance. Amongst the divisions caused by Jesus,
Nicodemus emerges as one who springs to his defence. As Jesus says in
7:17, those who do God's will know whether he is teaching from god or from
his own authority, which would put Nicodemus in a good light. However, these
positive readings are overshadowed by other indications. The words of
defence and accusation are both labelled as 'muttering', which does not
convey a sense of a frank confession of faith from Nicodemus. In echoing
Jesus, who in v.24 said, "Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right
judgment", Nicodemus, saying, "does our law judge a man without first giving
him a hearing and learning what he does?" shows his desire to maintain the
proper concerns of the law, but does not display any faith. By the end of his
second appearance, the reader is still uncertain about Nicodemus.
Nonetheless, he does show a very human characteristic and failing, that of
timidity.

59 Stibbe, John, p.94.

 52

(c)19 :38-42

The last scenes of the gospel provide us with a variety of responses

from a fair number of characters to Jesus' death and of their understanding of
its meaning. We come full circle with Nicodemus. He, to whom the glorification
is revealed in chapter 3 is present at the burial, though to what extent he
understands it is left unstated. This, the third and last of Nicodemus'
appearances, is the one where the sense of time is most acute. After the end
of the barrier time-shapeso ( a notation of the prescribed time limit within
which the hero's task has to be completed) the hour has come.ei Now
process time-shapes ( indications of the passing of time), in the form of
reference to the festivals, and retrospective time-shapes (reminders of earlier
events in the story), show how events have unfolded purposefully to this point,
and include Nicodemus' reappearances. As he did in chapter 3, so the
narrator does in 19. 35, linking the Jesus of history with the Christ of faith. But
Nicodemus' final act remains ambiguous : is it a recognition of Christ's true
nature, or simply a lament for a lost leader ?
Nicodemus appears almost as an aide to Joseph of Arimathea in this
third appearance. It would have needed more than one person to carry both
Jesus' corpse and a hundred pounds of spices! A man of Joseph's status
could have used servants for that role - however Nicodemus becomes
involved. Maybe the presence of a Pharisee guaranteed the correctness of the
burial ritual. Joseph is labelled more positively than Nicodemus, as a disciple
of Jesus, but he shares Nicodemus' secrecy, 'for fear of the Jews'. On the most
negative reading, this puts them both on a par with the description of secret
disciples in 12: 42-43 { 'for they valued human reputation rather than the
honour which comes from God'). On the other hand, they would have had to
ask publicly for the body of Jesus. And the behaviour of the other disciples
after the crucifixion was much like Joseph's and Nicodemus' behaviour before
it - they hid behind closed doors. And, if it is an extravagant attempt to prevent
the body from decay, is that not a misunderstanding consonant with Peter and
the beloved disciple, who also failed to grasp the meaning of resurrection until
Jesus appeared to them?
How far can we take the contrast between Nicodemus and Joseph of

60 The technical terms here are further explained in, Stibbe, John, p.15.
61 stibbe, John , p. 195.
 53
Arimathea? They shared in the boldness of taking Christ down from the cross,
and taking him to his grave (although John, unlike the Synoptics, does not say
that this was by night). How much more had Joseph done to be counted as a
disciple ?

It just so happened that there was a new tomb in the garden - it does
not appear to have been dug especially for Joseph. How much would those
two have realised it was to be a new tomb in other ways too ?
In Mark 15. 43, Joseph plucks up courage to ask for Jesus' body. It's his
burst of courage, breaking free from his timidity, which seems to mark him out
from Nicodemus. In fact, they are hurrying to bury him before the sabbath,
which will, they do not realise, be the last of the old creation and the first of the
new creation. The Nicodemus who has such a liminal role is presiding over
the burial rites of the old order. All the details about the burial are noted
specially - and yet it's to prove the least successful burial ever!

(d) Overview

The problem with dealing with the three segments individually is that
we lose a sense of the coherence of John's narrative strategy, and his
rhetorical deployment of Nicodemus with regard to his theme. At the end of
chapter 2 the implied author asserts his authority as a witness by utilising his
knowledge of scripture and his post - resurrection perspective. Impressing the
implied reader with these credentials, he makes explicit the hints he has been
making about the deeper meaning of Jesus' remarks, and the difficulties
people had in following him (in all senses). Having explained Jesus' double
meaning of v. 19 in v. 21, and displayed the varied implications of pisteuin in
w . 23 and 24, he has put the implied reader in a good position to appreciate a
knowing eavesdropping on the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus.
The implied author is training the implied reader to look for double meanings -
much in the same way that Jesus is training his disciples. Nicodemus is the
one on whom Jesus practises this training, and in the readers' enjoyment of
being on the inside track, the author buttresses the sense of knowing with
which he has been endowing the reader from the prologue onwards. In this
way, the relationship between author and reader is nurtured and brought
close. Staley notes that the Nicodemus conversation comes as it does after
the Cana sign, where the author and reader relationship has been strained by
 54
the reversal of expectations in w . 3-5.62 Here the reader is left to work out the
meaning for himself. The Gana miracle is not just a challenge to the faith of
those at the wedding to trust in things unseen. It is also a challenge to the
reader to trust in things unseen. It as if the author leaves the reader on his
own for a little while. But the introduction to the Nicodemus episode - the end
of chapter 2 - is the recommencement of the closer author / reader
relationship.

The reader is presented with two patterns of clues concerning

Nicodemus. One set define him by his background - from the Jews, and from
the Pharisees, moving by night; and another set by his current activities -
moving towards Jesus, acknowledging him, defending him, taking part in his
burial rites. Jesus' reaction to Nicodemus in 3: 1 -21 lacks his encouraging
stance towards Philip and Thomas in 14: 8-11, and 20:24 - 29. Still John does
not provide us with any comment as to where Nicodemus is on the scale from
true believer to unbeliever.
How then does this characterisation affect the reader? The ambiguity of
Nicodemus leaves it up to the reader to decide ( or to choose not to decide ).
He compels the reader to ask questions about what faith is, especially faith as
John presents it. So Nicodemus' ambiguity gives us the chance to think more
precisely about the nature of faith in a way in which more cut - and - dried
characterisations do not. He is living out the conflict between the old and the
new - and the continuing tension marks him out from the other disciples who
have got off the fence, and put their point of origin behind them.

3. Nicodemus. Time and Understanding

The Nicodemus passages address the readers as people who

seek, in an integrated way, the one who is both Jesus of Nazareth and the
Christ figure. Xavier Leon-Dufour, shows how Chapter 3 in particular
illustrates John's use of symbolism, and how it seeks to communicate the
verities of life and faith.63 Leon-Dufour identifies two levels of symbolic
operation. The first is 'acknowledging analogical relationship between two
realities in the framework of a special cultural world', such as using bread to
connote both physical nourishment and spiritual feeding. On the second level.

62stalev. First Kiss, p.97.

63 X.Leon-Dufour, Towards a Symbolic Reading of the Fourth Gospel, N.T.S. vol.27, pp. 439-
455.
 55
the interplay of different cultural milieus allows for a double symbolism. Bread,
thus can be the Jewish manna from heaven, or it can be the Christian bread of
the Lord's supper. Leon- Dufour suggests that these two symbolic readings
can be held 'in a dialectical relationship, that is, neither one or the other
should drive its opposite number from the field The only viable reading is
....the one which, from the Christian point of view, discovers the relationship
between the present reality of the spirit and the times past of Jesus of
Nazareth'.64 Noting that John seeks, in 20.31, to establish a common
language between his readers and himself, Leon- Dufour says that John
'wants to establish a language which would unify his readers. That is
the final aim of all authentic symbolism, to open the way to
communication , to a communion through a language accepted in all

its breadth John's is a style which invites us to believe that

Jesus Christ is one and the same under successive manifestations,
that of Jesus and that of the glorified Christ. Through the verb to be.
faith accomplishes a symbolic operation which identifies the two
manifestations of this one being'.^5
To my knowledge, Leon- Dufour is one of the few scholars ( along
with J.L. Martyn and J. Painter) to have addressed this issue of symbolic
understanding, in this way, in the sense that the implied author addresses the
implied reader in a spectrum which covers two senses of time. Most narrative
critical treatments address the question of infra-textual times when
considering time, symbolism and belief.
The writer is John, who, through his choice of episodes and sayings
as well as by his portrayal of the characters involved, enables the
reader to discern the relationships between the two situations, the
one that he experiences today, and the one that was experienced by
the contemporaries of Jesus of Nazareth ... As for the 'writer of the
dialogues' he presents Jesus in contact with the Jews, his
contemporaries, but at the same time, he projects upon them the

situations of every man who encounters Jesus'.^^

Leon- Dufour uses the first Nicodemus episode as an illustration of this,
and it may be possible to integrate Leon- Dufour's critical approval with a
wider narrative-critical / hermeneutical framework. Examining the discourse on
rebirth, Leon-Dufour suggests that the historical critics are wrong to see two

64 Leon-Dufour, Towards. p.440.

65 Leon-Dufour, Towards, p.442.

66 Leon-Dufour, Towards, p.442.

 56
redactional steps in the writing of 3: 5, one implying rebirth through the spirit,
and the next, rebirth through Baptism and the spirit. He says 'Our present text
would have been written by John both in a sacramental perspective and in a
non-sacramental one'. He suggests that this is feasible, and not confusing, if
we adopt his idea of there being two times in revelation. In one time of
revelation, Jesus reveals himself to Nicodemus; in another the Spirit speaks
to the reader of the gospel. John evokes the values expressed both in pre-
resurrection and post-resurrection initiation practices, drawing out all the
potential significances in all their fullness. One thing works through another,
and Nicodemus should be able to see that water symbolises the Spirit's
rebirth as well as a public entrance into the Christian community. 'On the basis
of a precise and correct understanding of symbolism in the richness of its
many meanings, the reader discovers that water can sometimes symbolise
the spirit, sometimes baptism, and even more, that it is and is not the one and
the other according to the different moments at which it is brought into
consideration'.67

The consequence for literary criticism is that, now that literary

criticism is engaging in some kind of rapprochement with more historically
aware techniques of scholarship, we have here an hermeneutical approach
which combines the textual and historical aspects of the narrative very neatly.
One consequence for understanding the portrait of Nicodemus is to see that
he is not limited by his time or place as a purely historical figure without
remainder, but his outlines have been drawn so as to enable him to act as a
figure who is representative of our searching. The advantage, it could be said,
of Nicodemus' ambiguity, is that it raises questions for the reader; and does
not admit of ready-made solutions. The reading experience and the believing
experience in the end seem to merge. Like Nicodemus, the reader has to
continually seek out Jesus, and avoid disappearing back into the darkness.
Jesus' elusiveness and mysteriousness continually challenge the reader, and
channel his energy for searching and seeking.

4. Nicodemus as a Contrast to other Characters

John draws an incomplete and yet involving portrait of Nicodemus as

he does of other characters. Yet Nicodemus' own role does, I believe, prove to

67Leon-Dufour, Towards. p.451.

 57
be more than simply a foil for Jesus. There are indications that Nicodemus'
situation belongs to more than just his individual experience, and by
extension, that he acts as a representative of - and for - certain groups of
people. In the context of genuine personal encounter that marks Jesus'
dealings with the Johannine characters, Nicodemus' own individuality
becomes evident in a way which exceeds the role of a mere foil. There is
something memorable about his equivocations and falterings, and what he is
strikes us more forcibly perhaps than what he does ( which is not very much -
in terms of pure action, nothing he does alone serves to alter the course of the
plot, merely to amplify it ). Even in the lightest of brushstrokes, John has
outlined a hovering and shadowy figure, whose lifelikeness is such that we
can well imagine a Nicodemus outside the pages of the text.

One prime method of revealing character is by way of comparison and

contrast with other characters. This method of course has its place among the
other techniques of characterisation - of asides, of straightforward description,
of inside views of the characters' thoughts and feelings, of irony and so forth.
In this way readers are led to identify with or react against every character.
Given that the 'human interest' factor is always crucial to a story's
development, the dynamics between the characters can potentially be very
significant. In John's gospel, however, unlike the other gospel, the minor
characters rarely interact directly with one another. Jesus is the centre of all
communication, exchange and interaction, at least for his followers. So the
comparisons and contrasts between the various characters will be done often
indirectly and implicitly.
Nicodemus' own role has particular resonance with four other
characters : John the Baptist, the Samaritan woman, the blind man and Mary
of Bethany.

(i) Nicodemus and John the Baptist

John the Baptist's only direct appearances in the gospel, in chapters 1
and 3, serve partly as ironic commentaries on the character and attitudes of
Nicodemus. The Baptist confesses his initial failure to recognise Jesus, a
confession Nicodemus never achieves. Nicodemus has been trained to see
the correct procedures and proper judgments, but John the Baptist, whatever
his background, can see the wood for the trees. The very place of John's
ministry, by the River Jordan near the Dead Sea, contrasts immediately with
the routinised, safe and secure worid of Nicodemus' Jerusalem. John is more
 58
intimately connected with Jesus than Nicodemus. As the first named character
and human being in the gospel, after the Logos, his especial role is honoured
as the one chosen to facilitate the revelation of Christ to Israel. Unlike
Nicodemus, he of course has seen no signs, but such is his disposition
towards faith that he can believe without having seen, even if he has to take
his time to recognise his Lord in person. The Baptist's repetition of the phrase
"I did not know him" (1.31, 1.33 ) entices the reader's sympathy for his role
and perhaps lets Nicodemus off the hook a little - everyone needs a little time
to see the truth. Nicodemus loses nothing but the chance of walking in the
light. Within the context of his community, John the Baptist came to recognise
his Messiah. Recognition needs prayer, study and experience - seeing Christ
face to face would not necessarily do anything for those who were unwilling to
take part mind, body and soul in the encounter as best they could.

John the Baptist's second appearance follows Nicodemus' first

appearance. The reader will thus have the Baptist's witness already set up as
a kind of standard, or rather an example, of what is humanly possible, and
against which Nicodemus will inevitably be compared. As in chapter 9 with the
blind man, it is Jesus who approaches the one whose faith is to be called to
be public and influential. The Baptist is here allowed to echo Jesus' words to
Nicodemus. As his Lord does, so does John talk of the one who has come
down from heaven, of the contrast between heaven and earth, and of the
witness that is rejected. He repeats Christ's message that God has sent his
Son, that those who believe in him receive eternal life, and those who do not
have another fate. The most obvious comparison is that baptism, the chief
activity of John, is also the chief subject of the Nicodemus conversation. The
meeting with Nicodemus allows Jesus to state the principles of baptism, of
rebirth into everiasting life; the meeting with John the Baptist soon led to the
outworkings of Jesus' message.
Viewed not just as an individual but as the representative of a group,
the Baptist has a marked aspect to his role. The narrator allows the Baptist to
proclaim to his followers the very message that is consistent with what the
narrator has told is the Word's purpose in the incarnation. John represents,
perhaps, a type of belief that is moving in the right direction, but which needs
encouragement. Allowing John's disciples to articulate their discontents, the
narrator can skilfully set the Baptist apart a little from his followers, and
therefore contrasts with Nicodemus, who is happy to be an orthodox Jew
amongst others of the same ilk, and does not outwardly pursue his faith in the
 59
full light of day. The Baptist shows the positive potential of his group, rather
than their inadequacy. The narrator does not say whether John's disciples as
a whole accept his testimony (although two of his group follow Jesus), nor do
they appear again in the gospel.

Nicodemus struggles with both aspects of the rebirth that constitutes

baptism. Since he is not yet himself born again, he cannot understand Jesus'
real identity. Apart from the heavenly rebirth, though, it is notable that he
wrestles too with the outward and visible reality of the rebirth, that is, the public
initiation rite. Being born again means, to many interpreters, both being born
again from above and being born again, as it were, alongside one's fellows
in their social and political struggles. Against all this, John the Baptist and his
followers had accepted the communitarian nature of the baptismal experience,
and their leader had at least accepted the provisional nature of his baptism
(1.15, 26, 31) until Jesus inaugurated baptism with the Holy Spirit.
The narrator thus draws together two people, both of whose respective
understandings of Jesus are insufficient, and need deepening. Both have
limits to overcome. Both to some extent represent their own faith groupings.

( i i ) Nicodemus and the Blind Man

Nicodemus' loyalties to his peer group's understanding of the Law and
of the scriptures hinder him in understanding the openness and freedom of
God's re-creation. To Nicodemus, the circumstances of his life may have
seemed to impose a regrettable but unavoidable restriction on the freedom of
his spiritual pilgrimage, especially any public witness. But he was not so
much a secret believer who lacked the courage, as someone who lurked in
the shadows, hovering between dangerous commitment and easy safety. To
Jesus, though no situation was fully predetermined - every situation bore
within it the possibilities for God's glory to shine. So with the blind man. Here
Jesus noticed the man whom the Pharisees, including presumably
Nicodemus, passed everyday, who was always there, and yet with their
blindness, they missed him - and his potential. But, whatever the causes of his
blindness, the blind man had the openness and the willingness to see, and
the flexibility to react with hope and gratitude. He had to face the
consequences, though. His healing, his faith, brought division in a way which
Nicodemus never equalled. The ripples of his conversion spread further and
wider than anything Nicodemus did. His faith and the effects on his life were
too much for those around him. The events exposed how little the faith of some
 60
was, and how little their understanding of that man in the first place. When the
man is taken before the Pharisees so as to obtain an expert opinion, he is
before those of whom Nicodemus is a chief member. The Pharisees' attempts
to understand what had happened were hampered from the start by their
application of cut-and-dried scriptural and theological formulae to the fleshy
fibres of everyday life.

The story of the blind man involves a role reversal of Jesus' encounter
with Nicodemus. Nicodemus approaches Jesus; Jesus himself approaches
the blind man at the end of chapter 9 (and, at least, if he does not exactly set
out to find the blind man personally, nevertheless the blind man is one of the
very few healings where it is Jesus who finds a person needing healing, rather
than other people bringing persons to Jesus' attention). Nicodemus only
makes one more recorded public appearance until the Passion ; the blind man
emerges into the light, both in terms of his spiritual and physical vision, and in
terms of his visibility to others. Jesus seems to be absent from much of chapter
9; Nicodemus exits from his first appearance without any passing comment
from the narrator in chapter 3, as Jesus continues what may have become
almost a dramatic monologue. Whilst Nicodemus remains non-committal, the
blind man is an attractive example of someone who makes the choice and
and sticks with it despite his sufferings for it. Furthermore, the relationship
between Jesus and the blind man is placed on a much closer and more
intimate level than the transactions between Jesus and Nicodemus. Not only
is there physical contact - the rubbing of the earthed saliva on the man's eyes
- but there is a common language of identity and experience. Unwittingly
echoing Jesus' great "I am" declarations, the blind man speaks up for his faith
commitments and experience, where Nicodemus remains silent. He is the only
character in the entire gospel to be allowed to use that phrase so crucial to the
building up of Christ's identity. And Jesus places himself firmly on the blind
man's side. Although Jesus at first is not forthcoming in response to the
disciples questions about the reason for the man's blindness, stating that it is
not a problem, but false claims to knowledge are a problem. As he says in
verse 41, "If you were blind you would not have been at fault, but now you say
"We see", so your sin remains". The humility of not knowing is preferable to the
over-eagerness of enamelled certainty.

Just as the question of freedom from sin plays a large role in the
Nicodemus dialogue, so does it here, but even more so, with the blind man. As
Rensberger points out, theodicy is a main theme, and Jesus' transfers the
 61
man's blindness from a result of sin to a cause of doing the works of God.68
The work overcomes suffering, it does not explain it. Both nouns and verbs
connected with sin are to be found more closely packed into this narrative than
any other part of the gospel. What the blind man grasps - what Nicodemus
fails to grasp - is that one's own personal experience, should be trusted
(though not in isolation ) as a pointer to the truth. Asked by the Pharisees to
comment on Jesus, the man replies, "Whether he is a sinner, I do not know: I
know only one thing, that though I was blind, now I see". The Pharisees know
their presumptions; he knows his experience, which he knows from within, and
he sees it for what it is in itself, rather than trying to fit it into preconceived
categories.

The narrator does not seem to make any explicit, unambiguous

advances in Nicodemus' faith. Nicodemus continues to come to Jesus, one
way or another, but never does the narrator make any reference to any
advance on Nicodemus' original confession of faith in Christ as merely a
teacher sent from God. In contrast the blind man refers to Christ firstly as '1he
man called Jesus", secondly as a prophet, thirdly as having come from God,
and fourthly as Son of Man. The blind man achieves his enlightenment
through confrontation. Nicodemus avoids an explicit and public confession of
his faith confrontation. At this point the blind man contrasts not just with
Nicodemus, but also with the Samaritan woman and with the disciple Thomas,
for those three all engage in extended personal dialogue with Jesus. But the
blind man achieves truth through fighting the authorities. Those who do the
most to deny and negate the blind man's life-giving experience are
paradoxically those who do the most to bring him to a clear understanding of
the truth.
The path to belief involves accepting positive and negative experiences
along the way, and seeing both as having potential for enhancing one's
potential for the truth. As the Pharisees, separated themselves so as to be
better dedicated to finding truth, mistreat and separate the blind man, so they
find themselves still working within the context of God's ultimate purposes, yet
placing themselves outside his salvific scheme. Faith and suffering are,
however, closely intertinked. It was the painful process of constantly
witnessing to their provisional insights that led the Johannine community to a
fuller appreciation of the truths about Jesus. The story of the blind man acts as
a bolster to those who confess their faith, suffer retribution, and still bear

68 Rensberger, Overcoming the Worid, p.44.

 62
witness. It showed that the promise of a deeper connection with Christ could
lead people to bear some pain with courage. By the standards of this worid,
both the blind man and Jesus himself can be regarded as one of a kind, as the
'blind'. Those who uphold those standards wield great power. The blind man's
parents, who were afraid of the Jews, evade their parental responsibility,
protecting their reputation and all too quickly shifting attention back to their
son. Just as Nicodemus did not hover alone in the shadows, so too there were
those who saw, those who understood, for whom public commitment was very
threatening. Chapters 3 and 9 interlock on this theme of faith as an active,
public, demanding way of life. Whatever the consequences for the salvation of
the respective individuals, the thoroughly and unavoidably interdependent
nature of Christian faith sets standards below which it is easy to fall. Faith
connects with others, and no one believer is an island. No doubt the power of
these passages when they were first written lay in their appeal to the
experience of a community which had suffered greatly for open commitment,
and yet knew how many were on the verge of joining them. One of the notes
of tragedy is that of the people who 'might have been'. By contradistinction to
the blind man, all the parties who do not confess their faith openly are in
danger of missing their chance to share in the adventure of open commitment

(iii)Nicodemus and the Samaritan Woman

Westcott wrote,
'The whole passage forms a striking contrast and complement to
ill.1-21. The woman, the Samaritan, the sinner, is placed over against
the Rabbi, the Ruler of the Jews, the Pharisee. The nature of the
worship takes the place of the necessity of the new birth; yet so that
either truth leads up to the other. The new birth is the condition for
entrance into the Kingdom : true worship flows from Christ's gift.
There is at the same time a remarkable similarity of method in
Christ's teaching in the two cases. Immediate circumstances, the wind
and the water, fumished present parables, through which deeper
thoughts were suggested, fitted to call out the powers and feelings of
a sympathetic listener'. 69
The contrasts between the two characters have struck people long
before the advent of literary criticism. But newer studies have sharpened our
awareness of what exactly these contrasts are.
To a certain extent, of course, Nicodemus is a foil for Jesus. But it
should be clear by now that his role extends beyond that. Likewise, the
69 B.F. Westcott, John, p.67.
 63
Samaritan woman is too a foil for Jesus. What is mostly unnoticed, even by
literary critics, is that, just as she understands Jesus more than Nicodemus
does, so too does she act as a foil for the revelation of his nature. On one
level, of course, this episode is an opportunity for Jesus to demonstrate his
humanity, to choose another to serve him. Outwardly, at least, he puts himself
in a dependent position. 'The Teacher first met His hearer on the common
ground of simple humanity, and conceded to her the privilege of conferring a
favour'./o This is one of only two episodes in the Gospel when the Saviour
asks for something ; the other being when he cries "I thirst" from the cross.
Such a rare and important connection should strike people as significant (with
the linkages John is establishing between suffering and glorification), but
even a major scholar like Raymond Brown has claimed that there is little
likelihood in the suggestion that the scene is deliberately being related to the
crucifixion, where noon is also the hour and Jesus is again driven to express
his thirst It is also the only occasion in the gospel where Jesus' weariness is
mentioned. It is possible to see a development in the passage from a purely
human view on Jesus (he is tired, a Jew, thirsty) to the view of faith (he is
God's equal). But I wonder whether this can be taken a step further. Only in the
presence of this unlikely character does Jesus demonstrate such complete
humanity, such need, such dependence. Is this, too, not a masterstroke of
John's characterisation, in that the occasion for one of Jesus' fullest human
revelations is in the most unlikely set-up, and this colours for the reader all
future encounters? Only at the margins, at the point of need and of social
boundaries, is Jesus' request ( and God's request ?) for assistance able to
be heard. After debating with Nicodemus about the law, Jesus comes and
flouts conventions openly, initiating conversation with a woman, and talking to
a Samaritan. Only those who know their own poverty are able to be confronted
so directly with the truth of the message. In the concentration on specific
literary techniques, it can be easy to lose sight of some of the wider and
deeper issues in characterisation.

This intimate connection between Jesus and the Samaritan woman is

partially achieved by the use of the mythos of romance, according to those
literary critics who follow Northrop Frye 71 . she is seen as a potential bride
according to their interpretation; John the Baptist has already been seen as a

70 westcott, John, p.68.

71 Stibbe. John. p.13. 69.

 64
friend of the bridegroom. Only Nicodemus is left out of this atmosphere of
wooing and betrothal. In this Cana - to Cana section of the gospel, the
Nicodemus episode increasingly stands out as a time when there is
confusion. Yet, with the Samaritan woman, the bonds are very close. Echoing
the tensions of the Prologue between God's will and human will, and echoing
the unlimited fulfilment of human need displayed at the wedding feast in Cana,
this passage depicts on one level two human beings on a search who
discover one another as if by chance, and fulfil not just the immediate needs
which have brought them to the same place, but also their deepest spiritual
needs and purposes. Nicodemus never gets so close to the real Jesus, human
or divine. Coming after that night-time encounter, life in the heat of the day,
under pressure, is that much more revealing.

Yet, as Westcott says, this dialogue complements as well as contrasts

with the Nicodemus episode. There are some crucial elements in common.
Like Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman is alone. Like Nicodemus, the woman
represents a group - the Samaritan townsfolk. Like Nicodemus, she goes
through a conversation with Jesus in which she is gradually being forced to
confront the truth. The conversation follows an identical pattern. Jesus says
something, which is then misunderstood; Jesus reformulates his original
statement; that is still misunderstood; and then Jesus forces his dialogue
partner to discover and face up to the truth for him / herself.

(iv) Nicodemus and Mary of Bethany

The contrast between Nicodemus and Mary of Bethany is most closely
marked by their alternative responses to the body of Jesus. In chapter 12
Mary uses a sweet smelling ointment for Jesus' feet, using an expensive
enough form of pure nard, enough to outrage Judas the purse keeper with her
apparent extravagance. Jesus praises Mary, and encourages her to save the
rest of the ointment for his actual death. In contrast the vastly larger number of
spices used in chapter 19 by Nicodemus, a hundred times larger than Mary's,
did not seem to have the effect that one pound had - we are not told of the
tomb being filled with the sweet smell of the ointment. Lastly, the contrast
between the amount of spices used marks the gulf between the faith of Mary
who believed in an imminent resurrection ( consonant with the experience of
Lazarus being raised ) and Nicodemus who believed, presumably, that if
anything happened it would be a long time. Nicodemus and Joseph have a
 65
more limited outlook. Mary stiows an ability to reach out and toucti ttie Lord in
her own intimate way, which seems to be possible tor the two men only atter
Jesus' death. Does Mary perform her rites of embalming better than
Nicodemus fulfils his duties ?

On a theological level, Mary shows herself more in line with God's ever
expanding generosity than Nicodemus. If the first episode with Nicodemus
acts as a narrative form of the prologue, the second appearance of Mary
echoes both the prologue - 'the Word became flesh; he made his home
among us; and we saw his glory' - and the central kerygma of chapter 3 - ' for
God so loved the world'. She incarnates God's gift of a light and life which
cannot be conquered, and a sacrificial giving which will bring the best for
others. The outpouring of God's love, exemplified in the use of nard, is
continued in the waters of baptism, and in the giving of the Holy Spirit. Only
those who are legalistic in their attitude to the Law can fail to perceive the
limitless generosity of which the Law had been a first step.
Mary's rhetorical role as a counterpoint to Nicodemus sounds a note of
poignancy. This Gospel accentuates the amazing generosity of God's love,
and also thus highlights the tragedy of those who refuse it Mary's faith does
not depend on signs. She has believed, and that faith has preceded her
brother being raised from the dead. Not that she has believed fully either,
because as the opening verses of chapter 11 make clear, she has not entirely
understood what has happened to her brother. The stench of death, however,
neither she nor her sister have to endure; only Nicodemus remains in fear of
its pervasive odours, and ridiculously tries to snuff it out.

5. Conclusion
Nicodemus is characterised as an enquirer, or an explorer on a
journey of faith. His approach is tentative, and he is trying to connect the parts
and the whole of his life and faith, sorting out his experience and his
expectations. He is in the process of trying to integrate his past experience
and present convictions with Jesus' insights, and his behaviour indicates that
he knows more than he can tell, one way or another.
The reader is presented with two patterns of clues concerning
Nicodemus. One set define him from his background - from the Jews, and the
Pharisees, moving by night; and his current activities - moving towards Jesus,
 66
acknowledging him, defending him, taking part in his burial rites. Jesus'
reaction to Nicodemus in 3:1-21 lacks his encouraging stance towards Philip
and Thomas in 14: 8-11 and 20: 24-29 amid their difficulties. Even after three
appearances, there are no comments about Nicodemus which can be used as
conclusive evidence one way or another to show him as a true believer or
unbeliever.

How then does this characterisation affect the reader? The questions
left hanging about Nicodemus' convictions compel the readers to ask
questions about what faith is, and to try to define it more precisely.
Nicodemus' response seems wanting, because he does not seem to engage
with Jesus as one who wholeheartedly believed in him might. The complex
use of symbolism draws the reader into unresolved issues about identifying
the reborn. Nicodemus' actions, are too, capable of higher and lower-level
interpretations. The characterisation of Nicodemus, does not then, really
decide anything that can be expressed as a theological statement, but it does
draw the reader further into the quest to find how and what to believe.
Meanwhile, Jesus is continually pointing beyond himself, and simultaneously
draws attention to himself, yet remaining enigmatic and elusive.
In the next two chapters, we shall return to look at the Samaritan
woman and the blind man in greater depth, and look for common patterns of
faith development and narrative critical methods of expressing them.
 67
Chapter 4
The S a m a r i t a n Woman

Contents

1. Introduction
2. The Samaritan Woman in Pre - Literary Critical Perspectives
3. Literary Critical Approaches
4. Revelation and Knowing God
5. Conclusion

1. Introduction
In this chapter, I shall take a sample of pre- and post - literary
critical approaches, to deal with John 4 : 4-42. The story of Jesus and the
Samaritan woman is the longest single encounter Jesus has with any single
individual in this gospel (or any other gospel), in terms of the amount of space
given to it by the author. This episode has thematic links, and others, with
Nicodemus, and further explores the nature and consequences of belief in
Christ. Broadly the methodological treatment will be the same as the last
chapter, but instead of detailing at length how the characterisation of the
woman dovetails with the others, I shall outline what is special about this
episode in terms of what it says about knowing God and the nature of
revelation. This time, though I shall make especial use of two writers ( one
writing before the advent of literary criticism and the other taking account of it)
who have one particular main interest - revelation - and examine their
arguments and seek out the consequences for the Johannine ideas of
believing and knowing, and the connections with the the thought of Polanyi.

2. The Samaritan Woman in Pre -Literary Critical Perspectives

The fact that the Samaritan woman has had five husbands, and
that Jesus has some special knowledge of this, has often been the most
featured part of commentary on this story. However, it is primarily a faith
encounter. The Samaritan episode is one which is treated by Rudolf
Bultmann in his commentary in detail, and one which brings out the essence
 68
Of Bultmann's existentialist interpretation of Johannine faith. I shall explore
Bultmann's comments on the chapter, using them as a model of one of the
most acute pre-literary critical treatments of this chapter. Then I shall point out
where Bultmannn misses out on some significant details, which his very
redactional frame of mind causes him to dismiss.

Bultmann sees the passage as dividing simply into two halves - w.1 -
30, Jesus' witness to himself, and w . 31- 42, the relation of the believer's
witness to Jesus' self-witness 72. As Jesus' revelation to Nicodemus has been
followed by the Baptist's witness, so Jesus' revelation to the woman is
followed by the witness of the believers. Jesus' initial request for water from a
Samaritan woman shows his readiness to abandon traditional Jewish ways.
But the theme of the relationship between the Jewish and Samaritan people is
not followed through in that way. Instead, 'its place is taken by the
characteristic question of Johannine dualism, whether Jesus' gift is of the
earth or of God'.73 The new fact of that revelation places old questions in a
new and different light.
The discussion on the living water, v. 10-15, is for Bultmann, another
episode in which the encounter with Christ
'means a radical reversal of normal standards: man, for all his possessions,
is in truth poor, and Jesus'poverty only conceals the riches of his gift.
If men are to recognise his riches two conditions must be fulfilled : 1) A man
must know what it is that he has to receive from God, a knowledge which is at
one with the realisation of his own poverty. 2) A man must recognise the
.Revealer when he encounters him in tangible form. Since, however, the gift
of the Father is the revealer himself, such knowledge and recognition
are intimately connected. Yet the knowledge may precede the recognition,
inasmuch as there is a knowlec^e of God'sgift which precedes the actual
receipt of the gift, a questioning, waiting knowledge, which contains the
prior understanding from which, in the encounter with the revealer,
recognition springs Such recognition is a recognition in spite of

appearances....'7'*
Our knowledge of living water, then, is potentially a step towards the truth
when confronted by the living word. Bultmann's theological idea of revelation
is that:
'Man possesses a prior knowledge of revelation, and this consists in a

72 R.Bultmann. The Gospel of John. (1971), p. 176.

73 Bultmann, John , p. 179.

74 Bultmann. John, p.181.

 69
knowledge of one's own situation which leads one to seek constantly for its
true meaning. In such prior knowledge man in no way possesses the revelation,
the alethinon ; indeed it can lead him to destruction, if he attempts to
derive from it the criteria by which to judge how God must confront him and how
the revelation must become reality. For it becomes reality only as an event
which passes all understanding. Our prior knowledge is a negative
knowledge : the knowledge of man's limitations and his estrangement from God,
combined with the knowledge that man must look to God for his salvation; the
knowledge that God does not confront me in my world, and yet that he must
confront me if my life is to be a true life. The event of the revelation is a question'. 75
Continuing his linkage with Gnostic dualism, Bultmann perceives in John a
positive relationship between human existence and the revelation of Christ,
because of the way in which the revelation is described in material terms :
bread, light, water. In the very act of mistaking what is untrue for what is true,
human beings show they have some knowledge of what is ultimately true, for
the attribution of significance to earthly things - even when it rightly belongs to
heavenly things - shows an ability and a form of knowledge. Revelation, is, in
Bultmann's view, not simply a revealing of the truth about Christ, but also the
truth about human beings. It is an experience of which knowledge of oneself
and of the other expand and yet still connect. There is direct and inextricable
linkage between knowing God and knowing oneself. In v.16-19, Jesus
displays his knowledge of all things, a display of powers that convinces the
woman that he is a prophet, and perhaps more than that.

This dialogue is summarised by Bultmann as not a conversion

narrative but a conversation narrative.76 in this he does to some extent
prefigure literary critical concerns, though he underestimates the way in which
John deploys the character of the Samaritan woman - 'He has no special
interest in the figure of the woman herself'.77 This fails to do justice to her
special role. He sees this passage as a demonstration of the possibilities of
the response to the revelation, how ideas of oneself and God are clarified and
the decision of faith made urgent As she learns more about Jesus and about
herself, so the reader correspondingly asks searching questions about
himself.
The spreading of the word among the Samaritans creates what
Bultmann calls 'first' and 'second' hand hearers. The messenger through

75 Bultmann. John, p.61-62.

76 Bultmann, John, p.193.

77 Bultmann, John, p. 193.

 70
whom Jesus works is of decisive importance because he leads others to
Jesus. Yet in so doing he renders himself of no importance, and the 'second-
hand' hearer now hears the message at 'first-hand'.78 A contrast is drawn
between faith which is spread according to the word, and mere human babble.
Some human words contain The Word; some do not. That places the onus of
responsibility on the hearer of the word to ascertain the true nature of the
words he hears.

Thus we are faced with the strange paradox that the proclamation, without
which no man can be brought to Jesus, is itself insignificant, in that the
hearer who enjoys the knowledge of faith is freed from its tutelage, is free,
that is to criticise the proclamation which brought him himself to faith.
This is why it is impossible ever to give a definitive dogmatic
statement of the proclamation, because every fixed form of words,
in that they are human words, becomes lalia . The eschatological word
becomes a phenomenon within the history of ideas'.79
Finally, he says,
Then it is clear that such knowledge can be gained only in the
eschatological event of an encounter wth the Revealer himself, and that
therefore the man v\4io bears the message at second-hand is in no sense
inferior to the man who hears it at first-hand'.^O

Bultmann's concentration on the theme of revelation in

regard to believing and knowing stresses of course the divine initiative. The
other side of the coin is the human search for God. To redress the balance, I
shall turn to one work, John Painter's The Quest for The Messiah which has
explored this dimension.si Painter's mostly historical critical work on John as a
quest story nevertheless takes account of the literary critical contribution. 'John
is a literary work from the first century. It is unrealistic to treat it as if it were a
twentieth century composition and as if everything depended on the reader, as
is argued by some reader-response critics'.82 His aim is 'to understand John
as a whole and to perceive within the whole the place of types of stories.

78 Bultmann, John, p.200.

79 Bultmann, John. p.201.

80 Bultmann. John. p,201-202.

81 J. Painter, The Quest for the Messiah, (1994),

82 Painter, Quest, p,5.

 71
recognisable within ancient literature'.ss He finds two types of quest stories in
John. The first group shows a variety of persons and a variety of things sought
for, though ultimately Christ is the real aim (realised or not) of these quests.
Jesus identifies himself with the the things sought - water, life, bread, the
kingdom. The different quests pursued are manifold and sometimes
apparently contradictory. Since their quest is for the Messiah, the evangelist
must communicate an understanding of Messiahship which reflects his
understanding of Jesus. 'Consequently, the Gospel is a self-conscious
reinterpretation of the meaning of Messiahship. It is also a reinterpretation of
the quest for the Messiah as the quest for life, for eternal life. According to
John, the Messiah is none other than the revealer of God, the one in whom
God is known, and in whom eternal life is present'.84

In relation to the Samaritan episode, Painter finds himself disagreeing

with Moloney, one notable literary critic. Criticising those who see the
woman's response as a model of the absence of faith, he takes account of the
'positive nature of the response which bears no marks of intended irony or
sarcasm on the part of the woman even though it does involve
misunderstanding'.85 Both the main characters are on their separate but linked
quests in their encounter. However, these quests are not of the same order!
Jesus is questing for drink, and for true worshippers. Painter notes that the
woman's activity of leading others to Christ follows the pattern of chapter one,
where every new disciple in turn brings another to Jesus. But Painter argues
that the revelation to the woman is the revelation of the Messiah, not of the
Godhead, of which aspect only the reader, having read the Prologue, would
be aware.86 This is still not knowledge of Christ in the fullest sense.
Painter notes the difference in time perspective between the
Samaritan woman episode and the Nicodemus and Temple episodes. The
latter two keep apart the present moment of Jesus' humanity from the
eschatological moment of fulfilment. In contrast, during chapter 4, the two
moments coalesce, because 'Ihe hour is coming and has come now". The end
feel of the chapter is success - the success of those questers for the truth, and
the success of the one questing to bring it, even if the recipients are often

83 Painter, Quest, p.6.

84 Painter, Quest. p,9.

85 Painter, Quest, p.204.

86 Painter, Quest, p.206.

 72
unlikely people. Painter ends by noting : 'John has transformed the traditional
stories into quest stories because he perceived the turmoil of human life as a
quest and Jesus as the fulfilment of the quest of all who were searching : the
ego eimi sayings have their place as evidence that , against all unfulfilled
frustrations of human life, Jesus was able to present himself as the true
fulfilment. All are questers until they come to Jesus. On the other side ot this
issue, those who seek and find discover that they have been the object of the
quest of Jesus and that in him God is in the quest for true worshippers'.87

3.Literary Critical Approaches

The reader's encounter with the Samaritan woman is deeply coloured
by what has just transpired : the dialogue with Nicodemus. A Samaritan
female follows on from the learned male teacher of Israel. She is taken by
surprise, yet progresses further than her predecessor who has seen the signs
but has not openly and boldly proclaimed his faith. Servotte appropriately
names this contrast as a diptych, though I think there is more to the
comparison than the 'same theme treated in a different tonality'.88

Inter-Textual Echoes
Drawing on the work of Robert Alter literary critics have pointed out that
the meeting at a well of a major character with a future spouse is a
conventional biblical type-scene.89 it happened to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob,
and Moses, and the references to Jacob reinforce the connections with the
patriarchs. Alter's work drew attention to to the role of convention in biblical
narratives. He identifies some 'larger patterns of recurrence in the
macrocosmic aspects of the stories and which are strictly tied to stylistic
formulas'.90 Noting that the same kind of story seems to be told several times
about different characters, or even about one character, he designates these
instances 'type-scenes'. He comments that the Bible does not indulge (unlike
epic poetry) in descriptive detail, except for matters of theological import, and
it uses everyday events as purveyors of things of great meaning, and he lists
the most common biblical type-scenes as 'the annunciation of the birth of the

87 Painter. Quest. p.212.

88 H.Servotte, According to John, (1994), p.22.

89 R. Alter The Art of Biblical Narrative. (1981), ch.3.

90 Alter, Biblical Narrative, p. 49

 73
hero to his barren mother; the encounter with the future betrothed at a well;
the epiphany in the field; the initiatory trial; danger in the desert and the
discovery of a well or another form of sustenance; the testament of the dying
hero'.91 The stories in Hebrew scriptures of encounters with the future
betrothed include the following elements : the meeting of previously mutually
unknown parties; the use of a large amount of dialogue; the use of more detail
than is usually employed; and an intricate use of the technique of repetition.
That is the structure. The content of these stories include : a hero beginning
travels in foreign regions; the stranger drawing water from the well; questions
and answers; domestic detail; and some interesting liaisons. These stories,
says Alter can be merely alluded to, or instead transfigured so as to draw out
the theological significance and historical awareness of a particular event.
The Hebrew reader / listener would anticipate such stories, and with that
background 'the biblical authors set words , themes, motifs, personages and
authors into an elaborate dance of significant innovation. For much of art lies
in the shifting aperture between the shadowy foresight in the anticipatory mind
of the observer and the realised revelatory usage in the work i t s e l f 9 2 in
John's encounter story, certain features are significantly altered. The scene is
dominated by conversation, not by actions. Indeed, Jesus' request for water is
not met. The topic of interest shifts from the provision of drinking water to the
source of eternal life. The woman herself has been married five times -
undermining any sense of security and fulfilment

These are all clues to the role of the Samaritan woman within this
dialogue and within the gospel as a whole. At the point where tradition is most
emphasised - the Hebrew convention of a narrative of a hero encountering a
bride at an historic well - Jesus moves radically beyond the habits and beliefs
associated with such a background. The moment at which he allows the
Samaritan woman to serve him is the point at which he draws Jewish
theology into the present moment and gives it its long-promised fullness of
meaning, in the sense of the message being extended to all nations and types
of people. Both the content of faith and the manner of its expression - worship -
are at issue here. Worship is the key issue of the chapter. But the worship is
worship 'in spirit and in truth', and therefore presumes knowing the true God.
Worship and belief are inextricably connected, and this chapter extends the
frontiers of what is possible in this world for encountering God and God's

91 Alter, Biblical Narrative. p.51.

92 Alter, Biblical Narrative, p. 67.

 74
purposes.
The inter-textual use of the pattern of Old Testament
betrothal type-scenes provides an opportunity for the narrator to engage
further with the reader. Some of the oddities of the Samaritan woman episode
can perhaps be subsumed under Staley's statement ; 'Reader- Response
Criticism's interest in the rhetoric of entrapment, then, may help us to
understand some of the narrator's self-contradictory passages in the Fourth
Gospel as neither tensions that need to be resolved through the invention of
multi-layered editing processes, nor as differences that somehow must be
harmonised. Rather, it might be possible to see the contradictions as tensions
to be embraced and analysed in terms of their effect upon the implied reader;
as tensions which might help us better understand the rhetorical strategy and
theological purpose of the Gospel'.93 After the uncertainty generated by the
Nicodemus episode, the Samaritan woman conversation leads to
rapprochement between narrator and reader. The author provides opportunity
for the implied reader to use his knowledge of Hebrew scripture, and in so
doing the betrothal scenes are brilliantly parodied, in a very knowing way,
which accommodates the reader. The typology at the same time provides a
re interpretation of the older stories which creates division between those who
see and those who do not. It also provides almost a gossip's eye-view on the
story, engaging the reader's attention as memories of betrothal are re-
awakened. As for the characters involved in the parody, it is crucial to
compare the knowledge of the character with that of the reader. The level of a
character's knowledge and the level of a reader's knowledge is the crucial
axis of the narrative rhetoric. It is actually central to a text's rhetoric. The reader
does know, for instance, long before the disciples, about Jesus' signs.

John 4: 4-42
Adopting the procedure used by Stibbe the following aspects of
the chapter need more detailed treatment in order to demonstrate the range of
literary devices employed by John to narrate this faith encounter: context;
structure; themes; literary devices; characterisation and plottype.94
As mentioned above, this section stands in stark contrast to Jesus'
conversations with Nicodemus. The place - from Jerusalem to Samaria; the
setting - from city to country; the time of day - from night to the heat of noon ;

93staley, The Print's First Kiss,, p.96.

94 stibbe, John, p.62.

 75
the gender - from a man to a woman; the social place - from a leading
Pharisee to an ordinary woman; from a request to the Messiah to a request
from the Messiah; from an unsuccessful dialogue to an encounter which
brings active faith. Along with Mary, the mother of Jesus, the sisters Martha
and Mary, and Mary Magdalen, this is one of several major passages (some
exclusive to John's gospel) portraying women as becoming faithful disciples.
Stibbe points out that feminine words are three times more plentiful than
masculine ones in this chapter - twelve words connected with gune versus
four from andra .95

The chiasmus of the passage shows that the main topic is the
nature of true worship. Verses 4-9 and 39-42 concern Samaritans coming to
Jesus; verses 10-15 and 27-38 concern spiritual nourishment; and verses 16-
26 concern worship. Both vocabulary and themes are echoed from one
section to another. These by now familiar themes reappear, but with new
additions. We have references to water, knowledge, life, truth, sight, faith, the
hour. Spirit, seeking, coming to Jesus; sending; the work of Jesus; witness;
and remaining with Jesus. The new theme is worship, and whereas the
woman has been worried about the 'where' of true worship, Jesus preaches
the 'who' of true worship, the personal relationship (as chapter 14 of the
farewell discourse makes clear) of believer with God through him. This
universal, not local, worship picks up the themes of how Jesus replaces
religious institutions as his risen body is to become the new Temple, as in
chapter 2.
John's use of literary devices here reinforces the strong sense of there
being different levels of understanding at work. Double entendre is obvious in
4:10. The phrase 'living water' conveys the sense of both fresh drinking water
as well as something spiritually more life-giving. The use of misunderstanding
as a device helps to carry the momentum of the conversation between Jesus
and the woman, and is also found in Jesus' conversation with the disciples. A
sense of contrasting reactions to Jesus is achieved partially by the use of dual
stage settings. We are aware in chapter 4 of action in the foreground and
action in the background. At one moment Jesus and the woman are front of
stage, whilst the disciples are backstage, searching for food; later Jesus and
the disciples are in the foreground, whilst the Samaritan woman is moving
amongst her people in the background. The juxtaposition of similar actions
with rather different results also shows up the contrasts. Both the disciples

95 Stibbe. John, p.63.

 76
and the woman make separate journeys to the town and back, but only the
woman's trip brings results in terms of people.
The full range of Jesus' characterisation and identity is revealed
In this chapter. Starting with Jesus' supplication for water, it moves towards his
self-revealing "I am". He is not just displaying ordinary human needs - he is
showing an acute and urgent need. This is the only place in the Fourth Gospel
where Jesus' limitations of human energy are mentioned - 'he was wearied
with his journey' (4.6). The unusually marked references to Jesus' humanity
underiine the extent of understanding the woman must achieve to reach full
faith. She must see, in this thirsty Jesus, the Son of God. The word reveals
itself in the flesh, yet the sight of the flesh is not enough - it is hearing, more
than seeing, that leads to conversion. This is the only occasion in John's
gospel that Jesus confirms that he is the Messiah. This first acknowledgement
comes in the first of several "I am" statements that link his true being with the
nature of the God revealed to Moses in the burning bush. The Samaritans, not
the Jews, are the recipients of this direct revelation. Yet it is also highly
personal - v.21, "Woman, believe me..."
Jesus' divinity is emphasised as much as his humanity in this
chapter. Out of divine necessity he must needs travel through Samaria. He
refers to the gift of living water, and says it is the gift of God, and only he -
Jesus - can give 11 His knowledge of human nature is complete - he knows
everything about the Samaritan woman. The titles used increase his stature
one by one: Lord, prophet, messiah, saviour of the worid, and "I am". 4:26
marks his first full personal self-declaration. Jesus demonstrates his
omniscience in this episode. He understands the strangers he comes across,
and he knows things which are hidden from them. But here, as elsewhere,
Jesus' revelation is not simply about God or about himself: it is about the
human beings to whom he witnesses. In the midst of the confusion and
struggles with life exhibited by the Samaritan woman, Jesus points to the truth
of her situation and of his. The growth in understanding of truth is not simply a
growth in understanding of another, but of oneself. The passage illustrates the
dynamic interplay of growth between God's knowledge and self-knowledge.
The God of whom he speaks is one who consists of spirit, and who must be
worshipped in spirit and in truth. God is not limited or controlled by human
beings, nor by the constraints of matter, however much God may make use of
those to make his purposes manifest.
Such is the effect that meeting Jesus has on the
 77
Samaritan woman, she reacts by calling people to him in the same phrase that
Jesus and his disciples use, "Come and see". Just as the disciples had called
one another to follow Jesus, she calls her people to Jesus. Outside the circle
of those close to him - the twelve, his mother, and John the Baptist she is
Jesus' first true believer. Indeed, Jesus addresses her with the title that
elsewhere he only uses for his mother, 'Woman', at Cana and at Calvary.

The woman, too, is depicted as a fully human being, one who is

in need, and as a woman. She reacts to Jesus with a mixture of indignation,
surprise and uncertainty. After her initial hesitancy she soon enters the debate
with vigour, and throws herself into her newfound mission. Gradually Jesus
illuminates her understanding, and to her he is able to confide his identity.
Both her personal characteristics and her lines of dialogue make her more
than a foil. She shows a certain tearfulness, but hers is overcome. She is an
example of a healthy progress in faith from a state of dependence on authority
- whether her people's or Jesus' - to an assurance which relies on experience.
But she is not just an individual on her own. She is also a
representative - of discipleship, and of her Samaritan people. By abandoning
her water jar, she symbolises the start of discipleship - the need to leave
everything behind, and so be free to witness. The narrator uses the analepsis
of "come and see" from chapter 1 to emphasise her role as a true disciple.
Then, as a Samaritan, witnessing to her own people, she symbolises their
potential, and helps to lead them to it. Her message, dia tou logou, brings
people to faith in the way that Jesus will indicate in the High Priestly prayer of
John 17, V.21 "who through their words believe in me". So successful is her
work that she brings people to Jesus. In this way, she fits into the description of
the true disciple in 15. 8, one who brings fruit fruit that will last because her
converts beg Jesus to remain, and it is those with whom Jesus remains who
have a permanent relationship with him.
Whereas Jesus is concerned with water, the disciples are
searching for bread. As W. Howard-Brook comments : 'At the socio-
theological level, it contrasts how Jesus and his disciples get their respective
needs met: while the disciples participate in the established system of things
(the market place), Jesus initiates new systems by breaking down the cultural
codes that limit the opportunities for sharing of resources among people.' ^ By
the time of their return to Jesus, Jesus' rapport with the woman is so strong,
and their astonishment so great, that they now appear as outsiders to this
96 W. Howard-Brook, Becoming Children of God, (1994), p. 103.
 78
encounter. The narrator emphasises that none of the disciples asked Jesus or
the woman any questions, in contrast to the woman's questioning stance. The
disciples repeatedly show their ignorance, which Jesus himself points out,
saying that "I have food to eat of which you know nothing'. More positively, by
using what seem to be contemporary proverbs, Jesus tells them that they too
are reapers and sowers in eternal life. Knowing what the Samaritan woman is
doing with the townsfolk at this moment, he invites the disciples to understand
his purposes.

The Samaritans hail Jesus as the Christ and Saviour of

the world. They go further than the Jews. Unlike the Jews, who are unworthy of
trust, according to the narrator's comments on Jesus' thoughts, the Samaritans
can be trusted with the full truth. Again his own received him not, and outsiders
have a special purpose in God's plan. Furthermore, the Samaritans urge
Jesus to stay with them. The word meno in John, indicates a depth and
security of relationship which has deep theological and epistemological
significance.
For a brief space, it is worth narrowing the perspective down
from the episode as a whole to the conversation alone. Given that the
incarnate Logos is in dialogue with a human being, not for the first time, we
may legitimately ask whether there are any particular characteristics to Jesus'
conversations, and to this conversation especially. It is, as stated eariier, an
unexpected and unlikely and illegitimate conversation, in that Jesus breaks
two taboos by talking not just with a Samaritan but with a woman. The
conversation occurs at Jesus' initiative, and yet the breaking of the ice is in the
form of his making a request.
The subject matter of the conversation falls in to two sets
of three exchanges : (i) water, in v. 7-15, (ii) husbands, v. 16-25. Both are
linked by the subject of identifying the God to whom true worship is due. The
man with whom the woman is talking is a stranger to her, and the elusive
Christ is a stranger to many. The challenge to her, delivered gradually but with
increasing pressure, is for her to recognise him for who he really is. There is
dramatic tension here - will the woman find herself with the fate of the world in
the Prologue, which fails to recognise the Logos? Every episode of the
Gospel has this basic tension, and John's plot development revolves around
the successes and failures people have in recognising Jesus. Different
literary critics have often widely diverging opinions on some of the dynamics
of this conversation. Stibbe takes issue with the South African scholar.
 79
Eugene Botha.97 According to Botha, some of the rather odd jumps in the
conversation, like that from water in verse 15 to husbands in verse 16, are due
to Jesus giving up on a so far fruitless conversation, and moving on to
potentially more fruitful topics. Applying speech-act theory to this conversation,
Botha says that changing the subject of the conversation so suddenly is a
flouting of the co-operation principles upon which all conversations rely. To
Stibbe's mind, though, this is another example of discontinuous dialogue, in
which the gaps and jumps in the level of literal meaning reveal the extent of
the transcendent element of his message just waiting to bubble up and burst
through. At the break in 4: 16, Jesus is able to reveal his supernatural
knowledge about the reasons for the woman's inability to receive his living
water. She has put her search for the right man ahead of her search for truth.
This analysis of the content of the passage shows how we must look for
evidence in both the form and the content of a passage for ways in which the
evangelist is trying to communicate his theology of faith.

4. Revelation and Knowing God

In the character of the woman a passion can be seen which is
akin to the passion Polanyi talks of in those who are committed to discovery,
whatever the risks. She adapts quickly, and eagerly seeks more, though she
does not know what exactly it is she is seeking. She has deep reserves of tacit
knowledge, which Jesus taps into, and which she can swiftly make use of.
Breaking the rules is not the obstacle for her it was for Nicodemus. In the end
she moves from being an apprentice to Jesus to being a teacher of others.
Meeting Christ has changed the way she looks at herself and at her wortd.
She has clearly experienced revelation - but what is the role of revelation in
Johannine faith?
Gail O'Day's book on Revelation in the Fourth Gospel :
Narrative Mode and Theological Claim98 looks at the question of revelation
and the Bible as revelatory literature. The book is a demonstration of how
John's technique of using irony gives him a suitable mode of expression for
his theology of revelation. Form and meaning are thus integrally linked. O'Day
identifies two current scholariy conversations : firstly, about the nature of
revelation, and where the bible as revelatory literature fits in with wider notions

97 stibbe, John's Gospel, p.181.

98 Q'Dav, Revelation in the Fourth Gospel, Fortress, 1986,

 80
Of revelation ; and secondly, the role of literary criticism in biblical
interpretation. 99 The book is an effort towards combining the two.

O'Day begins by addressing basic questions and assumptions

about revelation, what it is, where it is, and in what way God can be
encountered through the Bible. She makes a very Johannine shift in
terminology by moving from talking of the 'revelation' as a noun, to talking of
'revealing' as the verb.ioo As a verb, the central question will be how, where
and what is God revealing? O'Day finds a point of contact between God's
revelation, where both form and content are significant, and literary criticism
take a similar approach to the text. Moving on to the specific features of the
Johannine text, O'Day identifies gaps in scholarly literature concerning the
distinctiveness of Johannine irony, and its theological significance.101
Providing a short critique of Culpepper and Duke, she outlines her similarities
and differences from their approaches, with the special intention of seeing
how John's use of irony invites the reader to share his theology. O'Day
identifies the characteristics of the gospel which make the theme of irony a
relevant issue to pursue in this Gospel. 102 Firstly, John's use of the Logos
concept - Jesus' identity has simultaneously to be grasped at the human and
supernatural levels. Secondly irony is dependent on the reader sharing some
knowledge with the author. O'Day says the common frame of reference is the
post-resurrection perspective, shared by author and reader, but not by the
characters. Thirdly, the dualism of John has been frequently commented on,
with reference to its main themes, such as light and darkness, life and death,
but the form of the gospel is also pervaded by dualism. There are, for instance,
plenty of double meaning words, which only become fully meaningful when
viewed in the context of salvation history. Finally, Jesus' own indications that
he knows some may see and some may remain blind shows that he is
characterised as one who reveals, and therefore his words are not self-
explanatory, but comprehensible to those who try to understand - this
involving the reader. Then, the conversation in chapter 16 between Jesus and
his disciples about talking in figures and talking plainly makes us explicitly
aware of the veiled language Jesus and John are using.

99 O'Day, Revelation, p.ix.

100 O'Day, Revelation, p.2.

101 n'Day. Revelation, p.3.

102 n'Day, Revelation, p.7-8.

 81
O'Day explores various categories for revelation - content, paradigm,
encounter, and dogma, and finds them all wanting, in the sense that none of
them do justice to the full width and depth of revelation. In fact, it is through the
whole combination of stories, metaphors and images that the gospel has its
effect. Whatever our attempts to reduce our experience of Jesus through
John's gospel to a set of systematic categories, there is always something
which will not be included or explained away. The reader is brought to Jesus'
revelation through the expressive and creative use of language. Revelation
does not lie in any one point - neither the meaning of the text, the events
before it, the author behind it, or the public proclamation in front of it.

O'Day takes the Samaritan woman episode as the case study

for her theories about Johannine revelation. (Her approach is not identical to
that of other literary critics. For instance, unlike Stibbe, who sees the main
issue of the passage as true worship, she sees the main issue as Jesus'
identity). She stresses John's use of irony to enable reader participation in the
text, and particularly his use of co-textual irony (irony that arises from a
contradiction or disparity between the text and its literary context). 103 From this
perspective she traces the outlines of all the kinds of irony to be found in
chapter 4 , especially where irony relates to issues of identity - of Jesus, of
race, of gender, of believer and non-believer. O'Day, too appreciates the
conversational nature of the episode,and its crucial connection to the
revelation. 'The give and take between Jesus and the woman is essential to
John's portrait of Jesus as revealer. The woman's struggle to move from her
vantage point to Jesus', to understand fully Jesus' words and thereby discover
who Jesus is, enables the reader to experience Jesus and his revelation in a
way that would be impossible if reading straight discourse'. 104 Her most
perceptive comment, and the one most pertinent to the issue of believing is :
'throughout the dialogue, John has let stand, often without explicit

comment, two contradictory perceptions of the same event. The "correct" view

is never allowed to stand in isolation. When Jesus makes an explicit statement

(e.g. w . 13 and 14, 23 and 24), John immediately undercuts it with

the woman's response.The reader is left to decipher the relationship between

the two perspectives and to choose between them . The ironic "double-exposure'

of Jesus' statements and the woman's responses allows for reader participation

in the revelatory process in a way that declarative statements could not. It is for this

reason that the egoeimi o f v. 26 has such tremendous impact on the reader

103 O'Day. Revelation, p.55.

104 O'Dav. Revelation,p.63-64.

 82
the ego ami is therefore experienced, not just recounted'. 105
The remainder of the narrative confirms the revelation , and maintains the
'come and see' dynamics.

John's participatory presentation of the revelation enables the

reader to encounter Jesus through the narrative. The multi-dimensional
narrative keeps the reader alert and searching for wider significances. The
characters in this episode become, from this point of view, not examples for
the reader, but fellow participants. Their responses to Jesus often indicate
their blindness to the second level of the conversation, making the irony more
apparent to the comprehending reader the narrative anticipates that the
reader will do more or other than the characters, including the disciples do'.ios
The personal nature of faith is thus emphasised, for the character
and the reader are linked in their journey of faith by the constant challenge to
present a personal response to Jesus. The revealing of truth has to be
matched by an appropriate responsiveness.

5. Conclusion

Literary criticism has extended, deepened and refined earlier

observations on the Samaritan woman. I do not think it necessarily contradicts
any major earlier approach wholesale, but it does rather indicate the varieties
of different readings, held together in a flexible frame of reference. No text
which admits to a variety of possibilities in regard to its main theme - belief and
unbelief - is going to permit of one absolute and unvarying reading. The
episode of the Samaritan woman, and particularly the conversation between
Jesus and the Samaritan woman, is one that gets at the essentials of the
dynamics of Johannine thought about knowing God. For the conversation
begins in a day-to-day situation, centred around human need. Both the
situation and the need are capable of bearing further levels of meaning. John
operates by association, and not even the smallest detail is without further
significance. The conversation invokes a deeply personal exchange. Surprise
is, as ever, a key element, with the disorientation of finding faith clearty
undergirding the movements of the Samaritan woman. The surprise, or shock,
operates on two levels : (i), in the way in which the revelation comes to its
recipient, and (ii), in the way in which, for the other characters, the recipient of

105 O'Day, Revelation, p.73.

106 O'Dav. Revelation, p.90.

 83
the revelation is one they consider inappropriate. The questions thrown up by
the beginnings of the revelation lead to wider horizons for both the immediate
recipient, the spectators, and those whose lives are later touched by the
Samaritan woman's mission. The fact that Johannine faith is active, dynamic,
and shared ( and subversive) is indicated again in the Samaritan woman's
willingness to share it. Ultimately she is free, as her people are free, to
recognise the divine presence in her own experience, and she no longer
needs to stay with her teacher all the time. Out of the well springs of faith the
world looks different. The outcast woman becomes a witness; the thirsty
wanderer becomes a life -saving rescuer and love- bearer. Moral behaviour is
clearty sidelined as a a guarantor of insights into the divine presence. The
insistency and urgency of the revelation means that it is potentially available in
the most immediate sense to any person. Neither is faith individualist: thus the
woman's representative role. Finding faith is a shared, not a solitary
experience; and believing is an inter-dependent role and a sharing activity. Its
outcome is worship - the first topic of debate and her final action of response.
 84
Chapter 5
The B l i n d Man

Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Blind Man in Pre- Literary Critical Perspectives
3. Literary Critical Approaches
4. Dialogue and Faith
5. Conclusion

1. Introduction
Chapter 9 of John brings together some of the most pressing issues of
the Gospel in a lengthy narrative. The restoration of a blind man's sight acts
as a focus for the key issues which John is addressing. The most essential
characters and groupings are all represented one way or another here: Jesus,
the disciples, the Pharisees, the Jews, the crowds, and the ordinary people
whom Jesus encounters. Every character and group of characters again
illustrates some of the range of possible responses to Jesus. Again, among
those committed to Jesus, there are nuances of commitment - and, on the
other side there are a variety of degrees of non-response or even active
opposition. John, writing concisely and allusively, takes us back and forth
within the confines of his Gospel (and beyond to the scriptures), to indicate to
us the role of the blind man in matters of belief. This story cross-references by
implication quite considerably with the episodes of Nicodemus and the
Samaritan woman, and as the third and last of my three studies, it will show
some common patterns of the development of the theme of faith and
knowledge.
We shall look first at what issues of belief and knowledge have been
traditionally seen to be raised here, and then at the contribution literary
criticism has to make to this area of study; and finally at the relation of this
cameo to Polanyi's interpretation of the believing and knowing scheme in the
Fourth Gospel.

2. The Blind Man in Pre - Literary Critical Perspectives

Before the advent of literary criticism, this healing story had already
attracted a lot of close attention. Some have rated it for its dramatic layout,
others for its use of symbolism, and some for its message of salvation. This is
 85
the only case in the gospels where a blind person is reported as having been
born blind. 107 This unique situation challenges the reader to look beyond a
mere healing, to a deeper level of experience, which, because of the love
flowing through Christ, effects the transition of a fellow human being from
darkness to the light. In regard to my previous chapter, the blind man differs
from the Samaritan woman in that she achieves insight through a
conversation on a fairly informal and intimate level, whereas he achieves
insight through the process of being confronted by the Pharisees. He does,
however, parallel her, in the end, in that his final fullest realisation of who
Jesus is leads him to worship. Both stories follow the same structural pattern.
There are seven exchanges between Jesus and the woman, and seven
scenes in this episode. Both in the end go through a similar process of
progressive change, despite the very different circumstances. Both episodes
involve the disciples.The presence of the disciples have not been mentioned
since they were together with Jesus in Galilee in chapter 6. It is the first
mention of their presence in Jerusalem with Jesus.ios

The episodes of the lame man and the paralytic are

connected by their shared occurrence on the Sabbath, and the subsequent
accusations against Jesus, and also by Jesus' absence in both episodes for
some of the time during the debates about him. However, the agility of the
blind man's thought and speech contrasts with the lame man. The blind man's
personality traits are not just well-drawn, as the lame man's are, but also serve
a theological purpose. His response to the opportunity of healing is more
positive and quicker than the paralytic, who can only claim that he gets
bypassed all the time. He is aware of Jesus' identity, the lame man is not. He
defends Jesus; the lame man reports him to the Jews. The blind man
achieves greater insight after the Lord has sought him out. In contrast, the
lame man is to be found again in the Temple, whereas the blind man is
excluded from the synagogue. Insofar as he has a representative role, the
lame man represents those who have absorbed something of Jesus but do not
make the final break with their past. By implication, he is associated with those
who seek to persecute Jesus. 109
Two aspects of Jesus' behaviour have been noted : the issue of the

107 R.H.Ughtfoot, St.John's Gospel. (1956), p.199.

108 R.Brown, Gospel according to John. p.371.

109 Brown, John, p.209.

 86
initiative for the sign, and the motivation for the miracle. Usually the disciples
see a problem or an afflicted person - as they do here - and ask Jesus for
comments or for action. Here, though, there is something about the blind man
which grabs Jesus' attention. John is stressing Jesus' initiative in this pastoral
occasion. The motivation for the miracle is intriguing. The Christ of the Fourth
Gospel is often felt to be less human than in his Synoptic portraits. Whilst, on
the contrary, it can be argued that the Fourth Gospel is the most human of his
depictions, it is nonetheless true, that whereas in the Synoptics, his miracles
are demonstrations of his overflowing kindness, or his compassion as Mark
puts it, there is much less mention of his compassion during this or other
miracle stories in John. Nor is it, as it might have been, a healing in the form of
the forgiveness of sins, as verse 3 makes explicit. Jesus does not formulate
any principles of the link between sickness and suffering. Referring specifically
and exclusively to the case in hand, it is instead an opportunity for the
demonstrating of God's glory. And what is implied is that what is going on is
far more than the restoration of physical vision. The glory of God is shown both
by the healer and the healed. The compassion of the Lord is one of the chief
means of the revelation of his glory.

Chapter 9 may be divided into eight scenes, in each of which

appear two characters or groups of characters, viz.
Scene 1 : v. 1-5. Jesus and the disciples, discussing sin and suffering.
Scene 2 ; v. 6-7. Jesus and the blind man - the narrative of the miracle.
Scene 3 : v. 8-12. The blind man and his neighbours, hearing the story
of the miracle.
Scene 4 : v. 13-17. The blind man and the Pharisees, in dispute.
Scene 5 :v. 18-23 The blind man's parents and the Jews, with the threat
of excommunication.
Scene 6 : v.24-34. the blind man and the Jews, where faith overcomes
fear of excommunication.
Scene 7 : v.35-39. Jesus and the blind man, in which the blind man
comes to full faith in the Son of Man.
Scene 8 : v. 39-41 Jesus and the Pharisees, where unbelief is
condemned.

John's arrangement of a basic miracle story can be regarded as an

intricate dramatic piece. As with much drama of the period, only two characters
or groups of characters appear on the stage at any one time. This serves to
 87
heighten the dramatic effect, and in the context of the conflict of this gospel,
intensifying this force. The scenes move quickly, and the narrator's voice is the
only interruption to the action. The pace of the narrative echoes Jesus'
reference to the time-limits on the period of his earthly activity in v.4. It is in this
context that the urgency of his mission and presence overrides the Sabbath
requirements.110

The dramatic lay out of this chapter has been well analysed by J.L.
Martyn, who comments: 'He who reads the chapter aloud with an eye to the
shifting scenes and the skilfully handled crescendos cannot fail to perceive the
artistic sensitivity of the dramatist who created this piece out of the little healing
story of verses 1-7. The end result is a dramatic unity which captures and
holds the reader's attention, and effectively prepares him for the important
discourse of chapter lO'.m Martyn provides an imaginative reconstruction,
complete with suggested locations (though he divides the chapter into seven
scenes).
John's strong emphasis on the dualism of light and darkness is the
setting within which the episode of the blind man is framed. Here the themes
of seeing, witnessing and believing as a human response to that light are most
fully explored in the Gospel. There are in fact only two references to blindness
in the gospel, here and at 12.40, where the prophecy from Isaiah 6 tells of God
sending blindness so that people should believe in their hearts. Nonetheless,
with the dense interconnectedness of John's writing, just one mention serves
as the connection to much more material.
The blind man moves forward in his faith just as the first disciples and
the Samaritan woman have done. From his healer to his Saviour, the blind
man progresses in insight, and then states his faith and worships. Two
opposite sets of dynamics are operating simultaneously. The conflict between
light and darkness is echoed by the growing disbelief of many, and the
corresponding schism and rejection of Jesus. The mention of light reminds the
reader of the Prologue, and of the true origins and destiny of the worid and its
true Logos. The blind man recognises Jesus' signs as being from God. Here
Jesus is named - by himself- as the light of the worid, as in 8.12. The
presence of this light brings judgment, but the judgment is not, it would seem
from verse 3, on people's past, whether their origins or their sins, but on the

110 Bultmann,John,p.332.

I l l J.L.Martvn, History and Theoloqv in the Fourth Gospel. 2nd. ed. Nashville, Abingdon
Press, (1979), p.7.
 88
main sin of all, unbelief, and their false claims to see, as verse 39 makes clear.
The paradox is that in the presence of the true light, people who know their
blindness gain insight, and those who think they can see are truly blind.

It is at this point that the connection between true faith and salvation
needs to be brought out more explicitly. John is here engaging in debate with
centuries of Jewish tradition about sin and suffering. Some parts of the Old
Testament suggest a child can suffer for its parents' sins; other parts like
Jeremiah and Ezekiel say this is not so. Is someone blind from birth, or even
from the womb? In her analysis of this passage, Lieu puts it aptly : 'Sin is not
independent of the response to Jesus, but neither does it determine it. Rather
sin is defined by the response to Jesus : it is not the blind man who sinned, but
those who claim to possess sight.' 112
The blind man episode acts as a prolepsis ( a flash-forward) to the
moment in John 12.40 where there is public debate on Jesus' ministry. In the
quotation from Isaiah 6. 9-10 i i 3 there is a reminder in the later chapter of the
divisive nature of Christ's saving mission, to save the sightless and to blind the
sighted. Mark uses it in similar fashion in chapters 4.11-12 ; and Matthew uses
similar thoughts but more positively associates blindness with cause and
fulfilment. Luke uses this quotation to round off his Luke-Acts narrative, using it
as a commentary on the history of disbelief in the face of Christian teaching.
Generally, though, this line of thought from Isaiah seeks to place the ultimate
responsibility for unbelief within God's design. John is not the only one to
speak of this blinding and hardening. Lieu concludes '..a theological
understanding of unbelief as blindness, with a degree of tension as to the
question of ultimate responsibility, had already been worked out both in direct
exegesis of Isa. 6. 9-10 and in the interpretation of the healing of the blind in
the light of that tradition'. 114
John uses the symbolism of water in this episode as elsewhere. The
pool at which this miracle occurs is the one from which the water was drawn
for the Feast of Tabernacles. The mention of the meaning of "Siloam" - 'sent' -
seems to reinforce a sense of Christ's all-pervasive apostleship. Whilst Christ
never actually says "I am the living water", this is an almost implicit image. As
Brown comments, this episode soon was given great baptismal significance

112 j.V.Lieu, Blindness in the Johannine Tradition. New Testament Studies, 1988,pp. 83-95.

113 Lieu, Blindness, p.85.

114 Lieu, Blindness, p.90.

 89
by the early church. In contrast, the lame man had never entered the waters of
Bethesda - Jesus had just told him to get up and walk. Brown believes that
John intended sacramental symbolism here because of the reference to the
man's blindness since birth. The new birth that is possible in the waters of
Siloam is shown to be derived from the living waters that Christ himself
supplies. The blind man would thus be representative of more than his
community; he would represent any human being turning from the sin of non-
belief to faith. Nor is it unlikely that the baptismal associations come so far into
the Gospel. Jesus' death is now much nearer, Brown comments 'as Jesus
death draws closer, his life-giving activity increases. If we are correct in seeing
baptismal significance in the healing of the blind man, this symbolic role has
as its background Jesus' approaching death'.ns

These associations of blindness and the use of water connect

with the major theme of sin, and its fruit, unbelief. As Rensberger points out
the largest number of words connected with sin of any chapter in the Gospel
occur here in Chapter 9.ii6 The questions of what sin is, and what a sinner is,
dominate this chapter. Disciples and Pharisees agree that the man's suffering
is the result of sin. Moreover, Jesus is accused of sinning here by breaking
the Sabbath law. The standards by which sin is judged are challenged by
Jesus. The Pharisees use Mosaic Law, Jesus encourages the blind man like
others, to look at the value of his own experience. The truth of his transition
from darkness to light is a greater truth than the letter of the law. The one from
whom all truth comes over-rides the technical details of the Law of Moses.
(Meanwhile, the Jews start to contradict themselves). The new test is
suggested by some of the Pharisees in John 9:16 "How can a sinful man do
such signs?" The social consequences of belief are well expressed by
Rensberger: 'They must either suppress their own experience or stand by it in
defiance of those, who, in their own society, are in charge of their communal
norms and their own interpretation. Johannine Christianity is thus not merely
a sub-culture but a counter-culture within at least the local Judaism wherein it
has precipitated so painful a conflict'. i i 7 Rensberger's work is a sociological
approach, not a literary critical one, but he makes some valid points, and the
two approaches are not incompatible.

115 Brown. John, p.380-2.

116 Rensberger, Overcoming, p.44.

117 Rensberger, Overcoming, p.45.

 90
The Pharisees had alleged that sin led to suffering. This passage
shows that suffering may have a place on the road to belief, although it is
never certain that suffering leads to belief. The real sin is unbelief, rather than
the breach of moral codes of behaviour, and so the real tussle occurs between
belief and unbelief. The blind man's experience of suffering is a crucial part
of his faith journey, and so the painful but purgative effects of Christ's
presence are felt to be redemptive. His deeper faith is not arrived at by a
peaceful process of reflection but through the challenge posed by the
Pharisees. The social consequences of belief, and public witness to it, entail
conflict with those who would not accept the believer's experience, and
accepting and entering that necessary conflict brings about a deepening of the
original commitment. Such an atmosphere explains the almost chilling nature
of Christ's words about judgment.

All the four Gospels' stories about the healing of the blind imply more
than a purely physical healing.The restoration of the visual sense-organ is part
of a process of restoring a wider, not entirely physical, vision. In John's gospel,
as in the other Gospels, insignificant details play an important role in the story
of healing the blind. The framework for the blind man's healing is the ultimate
question of who is a sinner, and therefore who is a saved man, and these
salvific questions of belief over-ride pure miracle-working. What is revealed,
for those with eyes to see, is the glory of God as shown forth in the words of
Jesus Christ, and the glory of God as shown forth in the blind man, who shares
in the great "I am" of Jesus by using the same phrase.
It is worth elucidating the main alleged causes for 'blindness', and
seeing how the theme of faith fits into that context. Blindness is commonly
ascribed in biblical tradition and commentary to one of the following three
reasons : (1) individual sin; (2) inherited sin, (3) the natural order of things. We
may tentatively suggest that the Fourth Gospel tends towards the third option.
Jesus neither entirely rules in nor entirely rules out (1) and (2), and by
implication (3) would seem to have some currency. It is in the very nature of
creatureliness to be imperfect - 'original sin' - and not merely a matter of
individual or collective wrongdoing. Both in their inner and in their outer lives,
human beings face the tug of war between the things of the Spirit and the
things of the worid. Deep within the person, Logos theology would imply, is the
ability to 'see'. An important growth point along the road to sight is the
knowledge that one is blind. Admitting dependency is something even Christ
has to do - he says that he too has been sent. By this point the blind man is
 91
ahead of the disciples - none of them had bathed in the waters of 'sent', nor
had recognised the Son of man, nor shared the blind man's identification in
the words 'I am'. The blind man is amazingly direct with his responses - not
attempting further theological reflection, but staying with first-hand
experiences.

The question of authority looms large in this chapter. Who has the right
to validate 'true vision'? The guardians of the old order are shown to be
inadequate, both by Jesus and the blind man. The Pharisees are looking for
new sights - Jesus wants to create in-sight. True authority is known not just by
a shared vision, but by a shared being. The recognition of truth is the
recognition of a common shared origin or destiny, the great 'I am'. That is the
generative point of Christ's presence of the light of the worid, sifting between
those who live in truth and those who live in illusion.
What is belief, once arrived at? In regard to this chapter, it is perhaps
best expressed by turning to Bultmann again, for he stresses the process of
recognition (which ties in with his existentialist theology):
'Belief in the Son of Man cannot refer to the expectation
of the Son of Man who will come on the clouds of heaven, but to the
recognition of a present figure, as is shown by the healed man's
immediate asking who the Son of Man is that he may believe in him.
as yet he is unaware that his helper is the 'Son of Man', the
eschatological bringer of salvation.... the immediate cause of the
confession is neither a theophany, nor a straightforward demand that
he should believe, compliance with which would be no more than an
arbitrary act of will. But whereas man's experience would remain
obscure to him without the inten/ention of the spoken word, so too
the word itself is only intelligible because it reveals to man the
meaning of his own experience'.HS
Bultmann had commented eariier on the Prologue on how John uses the
motif of light to explore the character of belief:
'and what is the significance of the light? By making the world
bright, it makes it possible for men to see. But sight is not its only
significant in that it enables man to orientate himself in respect of
objects, sight is at the s a m e time the means whereby man
understands himself in his world, the reason he does not "grope in
the dark", but sees his "way". In its original sense light is not an
apparatus for illumination, that makes things perceptible, but is the
brightness itself in which I find myself here and now; in it I can find my
way about, 1 feel myself at home and have no anxiety. Brightness itself

118 Buitmann, John, p.339.

 92
is not therefore an outward phenomenon, but is the illumined
condition of existence, of my own existence the more
completely phos is regarded as something eschatological, the
stronger grows the conviction that the definitive illumination of
existence does not lie within human possibilities, but can only be

divine gift'. 119

3.Literarv Critical Approaches

The surrounding framework for this episode is the conflict

between Christ and the Jews, and this conflict gives rise to the emotive
language. This chapter follows Jesus' secret exit from the Temple to avoid the
stone-throwers. Despite what might have been good reason to leave
Jerusalem, Jesus is still there. Christ's ministry has thus far been full of
incident, characterised by feedings, healings and witnessing, and with
accompanying divisions of opinion over his true identity. The pace of the story
begins to slow down here, and it now takes ten chapters to proceed from the
feast of Tabernacles to the final Passover. W. Howard-Brook notes that this
chapter, along with the following section until the Passion, are incorporated
not to primarily show the greatness of Jesus, but 'for its power to generate and
sustain a community of discipleship'.i20 in fact there are three main strands to
this chapter in terms of story-telling : (1) the mixed experiences of discipleship
to which Jesus invites people, and the rejection of this by others; (2) a pathetic
story of rejection and betrayal by the nearest and dearest not out of conviction
but out of timidity before the worfd's power structures; (3) the undertying
background of the unceasing blindness of woridly authorities, especially to the
poweriess.
In contrast to the character of Jesus, a small number of
characters in the Fourth Gospel show evidence of considerable change during
the course of their appearances. The blind man is one of the most prominent
examples of this in the gospel, along with the Samaritan Woman. Staley notes
Robert Alter's comments on the art of characterisation in ancient Hebrew
narrative, who describes the four modes of narrative and lists (1) the
narrator's description of the character in terms of actions, appearances, or
attitudes and intentions; (2) one character's comments on another; (3) the

119 Bultmann. John, pp.40-43.

120 Howard-Brook, Becomino.p.212.

 93
direct speech of the character; (4) inward speech (interior monologue). One of
Alter's most perceptive comments is that the words of Hebrew characters are
often 'more of a drawn shutter than an open window'. 121

In terms of the literary form of the narrative, the closest

chapter to chapter 9 in terms of form is chapter 5. John's miracle stories fall
into three main groups, from Cana, from Galilee, and from Jerusalem. The
blind man and the lame man both belong in the Jerusalem group. Both have
in common the following features : one sick man, whose history is given, is
healed at Jesus' initiative, at a pool in Jerusalem, on the Sabbath day. After
Jesus' consequent disappearance, he is accused of breaking the Sabbath
law, and then the Jews quiz the man on Jesus' whereabouts. After this Jesus
reappears, and at some point there is an explanation of the relationship
between sickness and suffering. Jesus' is virtually put on trial for this, and the
deed is referred to as a 'work'.
The structure of chapter 9 is one of the most intricate thus far in
the Fourth Gospel. Whilst historical critical approaches have tried to reduce
the episode to an amplification of a small handful of verses from an original
miracle story, narratological interpretation shows there to be a finely textured
pattern of development of thought and action. W.Howard-Brook analyses two
attempts to find a chiastic structure in the passage. Rejecting these two
attempts, one of which would see the Pharisees' rejection of the parent's
testimony at the centre, and the second of which puts the conflict between the
parents and the Pharisees at the centre, he suggests an alternative, which
would place the parents alone at the centre of the narrative, with their refusal
to tell what they know for fear of being expelled. W. Howard -Brook suggests:
a: 1 -5 : Jesus' disciples : ask a question that alienates them from Jesus
b: 6-7 ; blind one : accepts invitation to wash (baptism) and sees
c: 8-17 : neighbours /Pharisees : ask questions that show their
lack of faith
d: 18-23 : parents : refuse to tell what they know for fear of
being expelled
c(i): 24-34 : Pharisees : again ask questions that show their lack
of faith
b(i): 35-38 : healed one : accepts invitation to believe in the Son of Man
a(i): 39-41 : Pharisees with him : ask a question that alienates them from

121 Alter, quoted in J.LStaley, 'Stumbling in the dark....'. Semeia 53. pp.55ff.
 94
Jesus. 122
The chiastic structure is strengthened by the thematic parallels
between the sections, on the themes of blindness and seeing, of sin and the
wortd.123 Whichever chiastic patterns one finally adopts, it is clear that the 'felt'
emphasis is on the painful splits within communities faced by the problem of
conforming to authority and the wortd, or to their convictions, and the
unavoidable conflict this entails. Whilst this goes beyond literary criticism, it is
usually noted how close this would be to the experience of the original
readers of the Gospel, for whom belief was not an armchair luxury, but a
matter of life and death. That this section is the key emphasis is also implied
by the sudden transition from the narrator's use of straightfonA/ard reporting to
a long aside in vv.22-23 . This is the one and only time in this chapter where
the narrator's voice is heard so explicitly.
Words associated with sight and with sin dominate this chapter.
'Blind' occurs ten times; 'eye' appears ten times; and 'see' crops up ten times.
Sometimes these describe physical realities, sometimes spiritual realities, and
sometimes both. Associated with these words connected with sight are words
related to knowledge and ignorance. The verb 'to know' comes up six times,
and the verb between comes up 4 times. There are eight references to 'sin' or
'sinner', the highest number so far in the gospel.

Characterisation
The Pharisees are of course as such a sub-group of the Jews, but the
narrator tends to lump them all together in this chapter. As the blind man
represents belief, so they represent unbelief. Whilst he shows increasing faith,
they show deepening unbelief, and the development operates in tandem.
However, the Pharisees themselves are split at the sight of the man, and
despite being constrained by the law, the nature of the sign is, for some of
them, something significant to be taken into account.
One of the possible structural arrangements of the chapter, as
noted above, gives the blind man's parents a central place. Their chief
characteristics are negative - their unconcerned relationship with their son,
and their fear of the Jews. They end up being the focus of the rejection not just
of their son, but of Jesus, and therefore of belief. The conflict between belief
and unbelief has struck at the very heart of the family. As Howard-Brook notes,
122 Howard-Brook, Becoming, p.214.

123 Howard-Brook, Becoming , p.214.

 95
the use of the word 'parents' is very unusual in the gospels. It is certainly
unusual to shift from the public examination of a person and his belief, to his
family background and upbringing. He suggests ' that in the context of the re-
creation theme of the man's healing, the calling of his parents links the
creation of humanity with the Genesis account of the first parents' sin'.124
Christ the Logos here participates in the re-creation of the fallen. The narrator
feels the need to explain this and so inserts his longest narrative explanation
thus far in the gospel.

The crowd acts as a significant grouping in this episode. The

'neighbours and those who were accustomed to see him'(v.8) ask the
question that the pharisees themselves will concern themselves about. Here
we have witnesses to a miracle, but the theme of the witnessing is not
developed. However, as Howard-Brook points out, this is not an
homogeneous group. There is a distinction made by the narrator between
those who have only known him as the wayside beggar, and those who have
been familiar with his blindness since birth. This is the first time the man has
been described as begging - his first mention was just as "a man who had
been blind from birth". The response of the neighbours and bystanders to the
blind man's answers are not recorded, but the fact that they bring him to the
Pharisees is disturbing. It seems to be a cause for puzzlement and concern,
rather than rejoicing.
This is the first noted appearance of the disciples since chapter 7. Even
here, their contribution is brief. They ask the crucial question of
the chapter: "Rabbi, why was this man born blind?", and then, having acted
as a foil for Jesus, they are not referred to again in this chapter. Their follow-up
question, "Who sinned, this man or his parents?" is one from a context in
which the notion of inherited sin through one's ancestors was common,
although the Hebrew scriptures are contradictory on the subject ( contrast
Job's anguishing with Jeremiah 31 ;29-30 or Ezekiel 1 8 : 1 - 4 ) . What is new is
the suggestion that the blindness could be due to personal sin, from even
before birth. Such thinking shows a common mind-set with the Pharisees, and
rather separates Jesus from his disciples, who here seem to be more of the
world than of the light.
But the way in which the disciples have appeared after an
absence, ask a crucial question, and then disappear again, makes us look for
the full significance of their enquiry. It becomes, in fact, a key question of those

124 W.Howard-Brook, Becomina,P-222.

 96
Who seek to find the true nature of belief, and therefore of its opposite,
unbelief, but also of those who want to know the reasons. That Jesus'
response to the question is not a technical answer but a practical action
demonstrates the oscillation in the Fourth Gospel between thoughts about
belief, and actions stemming from belief. By way of contrast, the disciples
have yet to equal the blind man's personal and individual confession of faith.
In chapter 6, Peter had said: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Your words are
words of eternal life. We believe and know that you are God's Holy one"; but
that could be read as a kind of group statement, rather than an owned
commitment. Servotte notes that Jesus' use of 'we' in v.4 "While daylight lasts
we must carry on the work of him who sent me" is indicative of the fellowship
between Jesus and his true followers. 125 The same use of "we" in 3.11 again
puts up the connection with Nicodemus., and the sense of true and false
disciples.

Jesus here is at the focus of the conflict between good and evil,
between belief and unbelief. He does God's works so as to resist sin and the
power of sin. The conflict is increasingly intense, more deeply felt, and affects
him and others ever more deeply. But it is not Jesus' presence which
intensifies the conflict. Conflict grows too in his absence. As in the lame man
incident, Jesus is at the centre of attention. Jesus is off-stage from verses 8-
35. However, he remains the focus of attention, whether he is absent or
present.
Stibbe sees ample room in this chapter for his description of Jesus as
the elusive messiah. Having evaded his persecutors at the end of the last
chapter, Jesus continues to pass unmolested through tricky situations. Jesus
is in this chapter presented as healer and as judge. The healing comes first,
but it is with judgment that the chapter ends. Judgment, Jesus says, is the
purpose for which he came into the worid. The discriminating Messiah brings
salvation, and brings judgment, sorting and sifting between belief and
unbelief.
The blind man's representative role is shown from the very start. There
is an unusual Greek construction in the first verse. The usual Greek definite
article is absent, and it is as if Jesus is not spotting one individual but gazing
at all humankind. There is no mention until verse 8 of him as a beggar. Never
is he named ( as neither the Samaritan woman nor the lame man are) in the
entire episode, even though his parents appear too. He is characterised by

125 Servotte, According to John,p.50.

 97
association -weakness, dependence, need. Tliat Is, until verse 9, when he
says something which no other person except Jesus says in the Gospel: "I
am". Ordinarily 'eimi' would have been sufticient - the emphasis shows John's
Intended link with Christ's "I am" sayings.

Under interrogation, the blind man gives his own account of his healing.
Howard-Brook notes five key differences between the narrator's account of
the healing and the blind man's account of his own healing:i26
(1) The man described by John as anthropos yet describes Jesus as
ho anthropos (cf. chapter 18), thus attributing a distinctive identity to Christ
which contrasts with his own common humanity.
(2) He refers to his healer as Jesus, whose name has not otherwise
been mentioned since the first verse. This man must have taken the first step
to faith through hearing, by listening to conversations about Jesus.
(3) He refers to Jesus performing the healing with the clay, but omits to
mention Jesus' use of his own spittle.
(4) The man uses the word epechrison to describe the placing of the
clay on his eyes. This word means to anoint. The narrator had merely used
epetheken , which means to put. Thus the blind man Is allowed to put his own
deeper, interpretation on an outward act.
(5) Whilst the narrator has referred to the pool of Siloam, the man refers
only to 'Siloam', as if the name and life given through that name are all that
matters, and the specific geographical origin no longer counts.

The man's role changes from being a semi-passive recipient of

healing to being a witness to Jesus. Jesus' only healing which is not
requested or urged upon him is the one that brings forth his most vigorous
follower. More than a quarter of the words of this chapter consist of the blind
man's own direct speech. His faith deepens progressively. In 9:11 he refers to
'Ihe man they call Jesus"; by v. 17 he understands Jesus to be a "prophet"; by
V.33 he is sure that Jesus is "from God'. In v.38 he confesses Jesus as Lord,
and by implication as "Son of Man'".
Like the Samaritan woman, the blind man comes across as a strong
character. He defies the authorities bravely, refusing to accept their line of
questioning, and simply stating the truth as he sees IL Sarcasm is evident In
V.27 "I have told you already" he retorted, "but you took no notice". Why do you
want to hear It again? Do you want to become his disciples?" He interprets

126 w Hnward-Brook. Becoming,p.219.

 98
Jewish theology himself ; "We know that God does not listen to sinners",
echoing the Pharisees' false assumption in v. 24. "We l(now that this man is a
sinner". He tal<es steps to protect Jesus, by not mentioning his healer's name
at first under interrogation by the Pharisees in verse 15 . He also shelters
Jesus from charges of three Sabbath violations by saying he "put clay", rather
than "made clay" or "anointed", and by omitting Jesus' command to "go and
wash". Under pressure, the once blind man reveals his stature.

John himself plays something of a trick on the reader. By omitting to

mention that this healing took place on the Sabbath ( a s in chapter 5 ) until the
Pharisees mention it, the narrator has allowed the reader to feel sympathy for
the blind man and respect for Jesus, unaware of the full complexities of the
situation.
The chief ironic feature of chapter 9 is the blind man himself, who
functions, in narrative critical terminology, as an 'eiron', a person of irony in
this chapter in the same way that Jesus does in the whole gospel. The
thematic application of irony is to the subject of understanding and
misunderstanding, with the play on the blind man's increasing vision, and the
Pharisees' increasing blindness. The questions and comments of the
Pharisees are increasingly heavy with irony, from their exhortation to "Give
glory to God", to their somewhat rhetorical question, "Do you mean that we are
blind?" The blind man himself employs irony against the Pharisees, and
indeed he is the sharpest follower of Jesus in this respect. Perhaps this is why
Jesus can be absent so long, from v.8-34, his longest absence in the entire
gospel. His upward spiral of conviction is accompanied by three times
claiming not to know ; the Pharisees' downward spiral is accompanied by bold
statements of what they claim to know. In this chapter knowing is always
expressed by the Greek word which incorporates both knowing and seeing,
rather than just knowing alone.

4. Dialogue and Faith

The blind man struggles through a series of conversations which
lead him to make the ultimate act of faith, to worship. That sense of struggle -
which is there, too, to a lesser extent with Nicodemus and the Samaritan
woman - is here put in the context of suffering. Why do people suffer, and what
is the connection, if any, with unbelief? Public commitment to the Christian
faith was to cause more suffering for believers, so what does this chapter show
 99
about how John's community of faith was actively facing up to that challenge,
and how does the reader become involved?

In his book The Gospel of John and the Sociology of Light: Language
and Characterisation in the Fourth Gospel. Norman Petersen 127 explores the
idea that John's language is a mixture of ordinary, everyday language, and a
'special' language appropriate to the Johannine community. The special
language transforms everyday language in such a way that it becomes an
anti-language. The way the language works in contrasts serves to point up the
difference between true believers and unbelievers. Petersen takes an inter-
disciplinary approach, integrating sociological, literary and historical insights.
This special language is 'one that employs the grammar and
vocabulary of the everyday but uses the vocabulary in a very different way,
leading to misunderstandings and partial understandings on the part of those
who can only speak tl)e everyday language'.128 This use of language also
differentiates social groups in John's worid. Whilst literary critics have given us
studies of metaphor, irony, symbolism, double and multiple meaning, none
have yet proposed, as Petersen has, that the gospel has a special type of
language. John's special use of everyday language involves him 'creating
synonyms out of terms that are not synonymous in everyday language and a
contrastive style of thinking and expression in his frequent use of semantic
opposites and grammatical negations'. 129 This means that 'because his
synonymy blurs the referents of his language, what he says cannot be
understood in terms of what his language refers to, but only,and in a limited
way, in terms of the differences between what he says and what the users of
the everyday language are saying when they use the same terms'. 130 with
regard to the host of literary devices employed by John, he finds 'linguistic
play between the everyday and John's special use of it',i3i rather than just
linguistic play within the possibilities of everyday language'. Petersen subtly
brings out in a study of the Prologue how John uses words drawn from
everyday experience to refer to things that are not part of everyday experience

128 Petersen, John , p.1 ff.

129 Petersen, John , p.3.

130 Petersen, John , P-3-4.

131 Petersen, JohlLP 4.

 100
The narrator doubly violates everyday language, first by using two
words denoting different classes of things to refer to the same thing,
and second by also using them to refer to different things. In terms of
everyday language, what he says does not make sense and we
cannot identify what he is referring to. Because he uses the words
and grammar of everyday language, we can understand what he is
saying, but we cannot understand what he means because we do not
knowto whatheisrefer/fnsi'. 132
The key issue Is that of reference. Quite what the things referred to are is
unclear a first - whether the 'word' or 'God'. The experience of handling
blurred language Is therefore crucial to understanding the Gospel, and to
sorting out the shifting emphasis on seeing, hearing and understanding.

Of crucial interest to a study of Johannine faith is Petersen's analysis of

the synonymous use of 'receiving', 'knowing' and 'believing'. Not only is the
'Other' referred to in terms of synonymy, with Its process of coming into the
worid and returning, but also the response to what has come into the wortd Is
referred in similar fashion. 'Receive', 'know', and 'believe' are the three key
words associated with reception, and these words come to be associated with
different social groups. And, just like the synonyms used to refer to God / the
word, the synonyms used for reception are unclear, because we do not know
what they are referring to. Receiving 'does not mean receiving as of an object,
'knowing' does not mean knowing some particular information or an object,
and 'believing' does not mean believing that something is true or false'.i33
Why does John employ such a language? 'John and his people speak and
think in ways that are in contrast with the speech and thought of others In their
social environment... John and his people oppose themselves, linguistically,
conceptually, and, not least of all, socially.'134 Petersen concludes that John's
blending of the referents of his language means that we should not seek the
referents but the difference. 'Jesus and others are usually at conceptual odds
with one another, and this contributes to the plot of the narrative because the
way in which Jesus Is understood by others leads to his arrest and death'. 135
Moreover, words describing the 'receiving' of Christ 'behold', 'see',
'know' and 'receive' - are 'quite cleariy not what is denoted by these verbs in

132 Petersen. John, p.9-10.

133 Petersen, John. p.20.

134 Petersen, John, p.21.

135 Petersen, John,p.22.

 101
everyday language, and neither Is there any idea of sensory perception
leading to language and meanings that make understanding in everyday
terms possible, as among the people in John's narrative who 'see' X, 'think' Y,
'believe' 'Z' .136 This habit is further strengthened when John not only does not
use referential language but also tends to characterise things by what they are
not. Petersen points out that the Beloved Disciple's reaction to the empty tomb
shows 'belief here explicitly precedes a subsequent understanding of what
was experienced and understood, and belief has no content, there is nothing
that is believed because it is understood.'137 The use of the understanding /
misunderstanding motif, and the whole range of literary ploys, can be
encompassed by the understanding that the special language refers to
heavenly things, and it is the problem of reference which occurs repeatedly in
the encounters and conversations in the Gospel.

In analysing Jesus' language, and that of the narrator, Petersen finds

that a variety of different conceptual systems are employed to communicate
his message). Petersen finds six of these systems : i38

1. the word / became flesh and dwelt among us / (Jesus is glorified)

the Son of God / sent from the Father / goes or returns to him

2. the Son of Man / descended from heaven or above /ascends to heaven

the bread of life / comes down = descends from heaven /-

3. the Light / shines or comes into the world / (darkness)

prophet or messiah / is coming into the worid / remains forever

Of these, the light system is 'the only literal form of reference to the Other
during the period of the incarnation'. 139 The Light system, he s a y s , is the one
which comes near to providing an explanation for John's use of language ; its
three principal characteristics are 'the everyday language of differentiation; the
non-differentiation of his special use of this language; and the contrastive

136 Petersen, John, p.30.

137 Petersen, John. p.40.

138 Petersen, John, p.63.

139 Petersen, John, p.64. The argument is complex, and the details are to be found in pp. 72
80.
 102
character of his use of both the everyday and the special language'.i40
From this, Petersen analyses what he calls John's sociology of light,
which has 'two aspects, one having to do with the social situation in which
John's people find themselves, and the other with their conceptual response
to if. 141 This language embodies the conflict and emotions of the fight
between the receivers and the non-receivers, between the 'Sons of Light' and
the "Disciples of Moses'. Chapter 9 is the most explicit and detailed working
out of the Light system in terms of seeing and not seeing, in the social context
of rejection. This chapter represents a war of judgment in which 'a special
language inversion of the judgmental process In which the judges of everyday
life become the judged'. i42. The social experience of John's fellow believers
leads to the use of special language to describe the incident around the blind
man.
This Integrated approach has much to commend it, and though
complex, reveals more deeply the intra-textual echoes of this chapter with the
themes of the rest of the Gospel. Faith is a shared experience, a journey with
companions, and the personal costs of that risk-taking are etched in the
material of the Gospel.

S.Concluslon
Chapter 9 achieves its effects through the skilful deployment of a
number of literary devices. From the moment the blind man appears, there are
loud echoes from chapter 3, and Indeed, from the prologue. Both Nicodemus
and the blind man are initially named as 'a man', both typify something of their
particular grouping and something about themselves as individuals, but both
are firmly introduced as representatives of the human condition. Neither the
weight of learning nor the handicap of blindness can detract from their
fundamentally similar choices and opportunities and challenges. The pharisee
and the blind man live in different times. Nicodemus comes at night, entering
from the darkness - and maybe returning to It? The blind man is a creature of
the light, and for the first time since chapter 3 Jesus mentions the time of
darkness, and the need to work by day ( 9.4 ). Jesus performs and the blind

140 Petersen, John.p.76.

141 Petersen, John, p.80.

142 Petersen, John, p.81.

 103
man undergoes the very experience Nicodemus balks at. The source of the
living waters himself performs the recreation of the blind man, transforming
water and earth into healing agents, and enabling the man to voluntarily
immerse himself in the missionary waters of the pool of Siloam. The blind man
himself uses words that understand the event in more vivid terms than the
narrator has used. The narrator says Jesus put the clay on the man's eyes :
yet the recipient says he was anointed. It seems that the blind man does not
merely understand, but fully understands. There is a certain pathos to this
solitary blind man, one heightened by the collective opposition of the
Pharisees to him, whose chorus of "We know", picks up on Nicodemus' use of
the first person plural. But their collective certainty suffers from the problem of
failing to hear where the spirit blows, and their deafness to its course. Even in
the passage about blindness, matters of hearing seem to be more reliable,
although they are not in the forefront of the subject matter of the conversation,
and are more elusive. At first reading, it is a story about blindness and sight,
yet on further readings it is the ability to hear which makes the difference. The
different levels of hearing in the conversation are the clue to its progression.
Since the ultimate sin is unbelief in the works of God, there is a corresponding
rise in intensity of conflict between good and evil whenever sin is mentioned.
Thus far in the Gospel, chapter 9 has the largest segment of dialogue
concerned with sin, longer than even Jesus' encounter with Nicodemus. In
another piece of characterisation which associates Jesus with the blind man,
the latter echoes his Lord's rhetorical tactics, picking up, on the Pharisees'
words, twisting them, and throwing them back. When he says 'We know that
God does not listen to sinners', the narrator has by this point brilliantly shifted
the sense of power and initiative in the gospel.

As has sometimes been remarked, the narrator here shows us one of

the most appealing characters in the gospel; in contrast, in varying degrees, to
Nicodemus, who both attracts some sympathy and some criticism. The blind
man is used, though by the narrator to show how risky faith is. The depth of
characterisation corresponds to the depth of the subject matter. The blind
man's final confession of faith is : 'performative and auto-implicative. It brings
about what it states - faith becomes a reality when the speaker confesses it;
and it implies a course of action which corresponds to the commitment
undertaken....The man does not formulate a doctrinal belief in the person of
J e s u s ; he merely says "I believe", which indicates a way of life'. 143

143 Servotte, John . p.49.

 104
Chapter 9 deals with not just seeing but also hearing. It is concerned
with perception and discernment, as well as their absence. It would have been
very instructive to know how Jesus would have dealt with the healing of a deaf
man, and how John might have treated i t At first sight this story is mainly
about seeing, but in fact the primary sense organ throughout is the ear. The
blind man appears to have already heard of Jesus, and 'calling' for witnesses
takes place, for a debate on who really 'hears' God. Together, both senses
seem to make for faith. 'You have seen him, and the one speaking with you is
the one'.

This chapter takes its place among others which give different signals
as to John's convictions about the relationship between signs and faith,
between believing and knowing, between commitment and wavering. The
evidence from chapter 9 would appear to be that signs have a role in
encouraging faith, but they can also bring about credulity; and that faith Is
dependent on more than sights and signs, and some measure of hearing is
involved. Sometimes it's like the chicken and the egg : does existing faith
enable recognition of the signs, or do the signs evoke an initial if incomplete
faith? In fact, the blind man's response is on a level comparable to that of the
disciples in chapter 1, and the official In chapter 4, because he responds to
Jesus' words before he has understood fully Jesus' identity. So the blind man
does not represent those who subscribe to an insufficient signs-based faith.
The response of the Samaritans to the woman at the well showed that faith
could be engendered through hearing alone. Why some people do not
believe is not something the evangelist explains except to make clear that sin
stems from unbelief (cf. 8 :42-47). The problem with those who put their trust
in signs alone is that in this gospel, they never seem to move beyond that
stage, the blind man has taken responsibility for his faith, and has risked its
practice and public exposure. The more vulnerable characters in this Gospel
are often the more reliable believers, in contrast to the more secure and well-
protected.
 105
Chapter 6
Conclusion

Each of these three stories Is written in order to develop the reader's

belief in the Son of God. These stories can be utilised by the reader In finding
a meaning which tells of and generates belief. The depth and complexity of
the literary fabric enables the reader to experience, not just watch from afar,
the dynamics of faith. The conflict between belief and unbelief In these texts
leads the reader to make his own commitments. Reading these stories of
belief is more akin to engaging in a dialogue with a constantly open-ended
conclusion. Through the conflict of value positions, the reader is swept Into the
momentum of choosing for himself.
Each of these stories aims to persuade - to move the characters in the
story, and the readers of the narrative. In each of them, witness to Jesus will be
Insufficient, unreliable, if it is based solely on Jesus' signs. Witness can be
trusted only if it is based on more than testimony to visible signs of God's
glory. The complex web of repetition, association, irony and different
viewpoints is one the reader feels forced to unravel. In each of these episodes,
there is a 'pathos', or in more contemporary trends, human interest, element,
which enables the readers to integrate their emotions and imaginations with
their intellect, right brain and left brain. Nicodemus is the story of the public
man gripped by private conflict; the Samaritan woman is the one who is
overstepping the boundaries of 'normal' experience; the blind man is
abandoned until rescued by the Son of God. Each of these stories also
Involves moving - from inside to outside, from private to public, from secrecy to
openness, or vice versa. Through dynamics such as this the claims about
Jesus' credibility as God's Son and messenger are tested. Our brief insertion
into the world of these characters and their thoughts leaves us with the
unfinished business of finding out what belief means and where it leads. Only
brief is our encounter with each of these characters; and their exits from the
narrative always leave questions unanswered.
John brings together an unusual collection of characters. You could
compare this gospel with the Wizard of Oz : a little girl trying to go home, a lion
looking for courage, and a tin man In search of a heart. The three characters I
have examined are like the others In the gospel: we do not know their age or
physical characteristics, only their position in society and their encounter with
Jesus. The conversations are realistic enough for them to convey something of
 106
their individual character, yet the lack of defining details allows them to serve
as types also. As I noted earlier, there is little direct interaction between these
characters. Their closest connection lies in their encounter with Jesus. That
shows t h a t , on the level of characterisation, the dynamics of the gospel centre
around Jesus, just as in terms of the gospel's themes, the theme of believing
predominates, and also centres on Jesus. The interdependence of themes,
plot and characterisation in this gospel is now much better understood thanks
to narrative criticism. The reader is pushed towards responding to Jesus by
the affective power of the ploL Having examined the variety of alternative
responses, the reader can interact with the characters. Some degree of
identification is possible, because of the author's strategies to stimulate
attitudes in the reader. As the story develops, the reader can make an
increasingly complex web of connections between the characters and the
themes. In turn the reader can imagine himself as the Samaritan woman, the
blind man, and Nicodemus, or any of the others. St.John allows the reader to
participate in the process of finding his own convictions by comparing and
contrasting himself with these characters. John conveys the struggle of
believing and knowing.

The Gospel of John is not a philosophical treatise on belief. It is a

narrative containing material pertinent to the issues surrounding a community
of faith. John wishes to provoke and encourage faith, rather than to provide a
neatly worked out exposition of the relationship between faith and experience.
This relationship is solely communicated through stories about other people's
struggles with faith. Evidently this gospel affirms the positive role of sensory
experience in the origin of faith. It assigns a primary place to the perception of
signs and basic experiences like seeing and hearing. Yet it makes clear that
beyond these must come a deeper discernment. Out of this deeper level is
born a personal relationship of trust. This is described as believing and
knowing. Faith is the work of God, who draws the believer-to-be. After that,
the human being is responsible for believing and growing in faith.
The world of faith in John's gospel is one characterised by personal
commitment. It is a worid where people use the maps of those who have gone
before them, but still make the journey for themselves, and when they have
made the journey, they fall down and worship in the end. As Polanyi
suggested, God can only be known in commitment, in worship, and so
religious understanding is a skill to be developed. Those who advance
towards faith in John are those who manage to integrate clues to a higher
 107
meaning in life through all levels of their existence. At each level, people strive
towards and then commit themselves to what they can dimly sense but not
wholly grasp. In ordinary perception, when patterns or shapes begin to attract
our attention, a higher power of insight begins to develop. There are rhythms
to these processes of discovery and creative guesswork, and John indicates
these by his complex network of resonances between these and other
characters. Those who see most are those who can move furthest beyond the
normal categories of seeing.

Ultimately this gospel is of course centred on one character, Jesus. He

operates with a keen sense of the value of tradition, but his life and teaching
was a constant questioning of the tradition where it had settled down and lost
meaning. Jesus as the rectifier of tradition was also the great discoverer,
pointing always beyond himself. The history and traditions of his people had a
meaning, and so had the lives of the human beings he knew, and there were
clues In them to tell what the true meaning was. Jesus had a deep and lively
intuitive insight into the hearts of men and women and the springs of human
action. John shows the reader, and more than shows, allows that reader to
enter fully into the process of believing in and knowing him, through his
choice of narrative technique.
 108
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alter, R., The Art of Biblical Narrative, USA, HarperCollins, 1981.

The Art of Biblical Poetry, USA, Harper Collins, 1985.
Alter, R., and Kermode, F., (Eds.), The Literary Guide to the Bible, Cambridge,
Ma., Harvard University Press, 1987.
Alter, R., The World of Biblical Literature, New York, HarperCollins, 1992.
Ashton, J., Studying John, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1994.
Barclay, W., John, 2nd ed., Edinburgh, S t Andrew Press, 1975.
Barfield, O., Poetic Diction, 3rd ed., Middleton : Wesleyan Press, 1973.
Barton, S.C., The Spirituality of the Gospels, London, SPCK 1992.
The Believer, the Historian and the Fourth Gospel , Theology
Vol.XCVI No.772 July / August 1993, 289 - 303.
People of the Passion , London, Triangle, 1994.
Bassler, J.M., Mixed Signals : Nicodemus in the Fourth Gospel, JBL 1 0 8 / 4
(1989)
Berry, P., and Wernick, A., ed.. Shadow of Spirit, London, Routledge, 1992.
Boice, J.M., Witness and Revelation in the Gospel of John , Grand Rapids,
Paternoster, 1970.
Brown, R., The Gospel of John, 2 vols. New York, Doubleday, 1970.
Bultmann, R., Theology of the New Testament, 2 vols, London, SCM, 1952.
The Gospel of John , Oxford , Basil Blackwell, 1971.
Calvin, J., John, Illinois, Crossway Books, 1994.
Carnley, P., The Structure of Resurrection Belief, Oxford, Clarendon Press,
1987.
Collins, R.F., The Representative Figures of the Fourth Gospel, Downside
Review. 94, (1976), 26 - 46, 118 - 132.
Jesus' Conversation with Nicodemus , The Bible Today, vol.93, 1977,
1409 - 1418.
Culpepper, A. R., Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel, 2nd ed., Philadelphia,
Fortress Press, 1987.
Culpepper, A.R., and Segovia, F.F., ed. SEMEIA 53 : The Fourth Gospel from a
Literary Perspective, Atlanta, Scholars Press, 1991.
Dewey, K.E., Paroimai in the Gospel of John, in Crossan, D., ed.. SEMEIA 17 .
(1980), 81 - 9 9 .
Duke,P.D., Irony in the Fourth Gospel, Atlanta, John Knox, 1985.
Dunn, J.D.G., Let John be John, in Stuhlmacher, ed.. Das Evangelium und die
 109
Evanqellum. Tubingen, Mohr /Siebech, 1983, 309 - 339.
Christologyin the Making, 2nd. ed., London, SCM, 1989.
Ecclestone, A. The Scaffolding of Spirit, London, DLT, 1987.
Faick, C , li/lyth, Truth and Literature, Cambridge, University Press, 1992.
Frye, N. The Great Code, New York, First Harvest / HBJ 1983.
Funk, R.W. The Poetics of Biblical Narrative , Sonoma, Polebridge Press,
1988.
Glblin, C.H., Suggestion, Negative Response, and Positive Action in St. John's
Portrayal of Jesus, New Test. Stud. 26,197 - 211.
Griffin, D.R., The Re-enchantment of Science, Albany, SUNY Press, 1988.
Gunton, C , Enlightenment and Alienation , Basingstoke, Marshall, Morgan
and Scott, 1985.
Hick, J., Faith and Knowledge, 2nd ed., Basingstoke, Macmlllan, 1988.
Hoskyns,E., and Davy, F.N. ed. , The Fourth Gospel, London, Faber and
Faber, 1940.
Howard, W.F., Christianity According to St. John, London, Duckworth, 1943.
Howard - Brook, W., Becoming Children of God, Maryknoll, Orbis, 1994.
lersel, B. van, Reading Mark, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark, 1989.
Jasper, D., The Study of Literature and Religion, 2nd e d . , Basingstoke,
Macmlllan, 1992.
Kelber, W.H., In the Beginning Were The Words, Journal of the American
Academy of Religion. LVIII /1,1990,69 - 98.
Kennedy, G.A., New Testament interpretation Through Rhetorical Criticism ,
University of North Carolina Press, 1984.
Kinast, R.L., If Only You Recognised God's Gift, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans,
1993.
Koester, C. Hearing, Seeing and Believing In the Gospel of John, BIbllca. 70.
1989, 3 2 7 - 3 4 8 .
Kuhiewind, G., Becoming Aware of the Logos , Massachusetts, Lindlsfarne
Press, 1985.
Kysar, R., John : The Maverick Gospel, 2nd ed., Louisville, Westminster Press,
1993.
Lee, E.K., The Religious Thought of St. John, London, SPCK, 1950.
Leon-Dufour, X., Towards a Symbolic Reading of the Fourth Gospel, New
Test. Stud ., vol. 27, 439 - 456.
Lieu, J., The Theology of the Johannine Epistles, Cambridge, University Press
1991.
 110
Lightfoot, R.H., St. John's Gospel, Oxford, Clarendon, 1956.
Lincoln, A.T., Trials, Plots and the Narrative of the Fourth Gospel, JSNT 56
(1994)3-30.

Macquarrie, J., Twentieth Century Religious Thought, 4th ed., London, SCM
1988.
Martyn, J.L., History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel, Rev.ed., Nashville,
Abingdon Press, 1979.
Marcus, J., Mark 4 : 1 0 - 1 2 and Marcan Epistemology, JBL,103 / 4 , 1984, 557
-574.
Marshall, C D . , Faith as a Theme in Mark's Narrative , Cambridge, University
Press, 1989.
McGann, D., Journeying within Transcendence , London, Collins, 1989.
McKnight, E.V., The Bible and the Reader, Philadelphia, Fortress, 1985.
Montefiore, H., The Gospel and Contemporary Culture , London, Mowbray,
1992.
Moloney, F.J., Belief in the Word, Minneapolis, Augsburg Fortress, 1985.
Moody -Smith, D., The Theology of the Gospel of John , Cambridge, University
Press, 1995.
Moore, S.D., Literary Criticism and the Gospels, New Haven, Yale University
Press, 1989.
Newbigin, L., The Light Has Come, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1982.
Neyrey, J.H., John 3 - A Debate over Johannine Epistemology and
Christology, Nov. Test. XXIII, 1981,115 - 127.
O'Day, G.M., Revelation in the Fourth Gospel, Philadelphia, Fortress Press,
1985.
Painter, J., Johannine Symbols : A Case Study in Epistemology, Journal of
Theologv for Southern Africa, vol.27. 1979, 26 - 41
Quest and Rejection Stories in John, JSNT 3 6 , 1 9 8 9 , 1 7 - 4 6 .
Quest Stories in John 1 - 4, JSNT. 41,1991, 33 - 70.
The Quest for the Messiah, Atlanta, Scholars, 1994.
Paul, I., Knowledge of God: Calvin, Einstein, and Polanyi, Edinburgh,
Scottish Academic Press, 1987.
Petersen, N.R., The Gospel of John and the Sociology of Light , Pennsylvania,
Trinity Press, 1993.
Phillips, G.L., Seeing and Believing, Westminster, Dacre Press, 1953.
Polanyi, M., Personal Knowledge, London, Routledge Kegan Paul, 1958.
The Study of Man, London, Routledge Kegan Paul, 1958.
 Ill
Knowing and Being, London, Routledge Kegan Paul, 1960.
The Unaccountable Element in Science, Philosophy, vol.
XXXVIII, no. 139, Jan. 1962, p.13.

On the Modern Mind. Encounter XXIV, May 1965, p.9.

Powell, M., What is Narrative Criticism ?, London, SPCK, 1993.
Pryor, J.W., John : Evangelist of the Covenant People , London, DLT, 1992.
Ravindra, R., The Yoga of the Christ in the Gospel according to St John,
Shaftesbury, Element, 1990.
Rensberger, D., Overcoming the World, London, SPCK, 1989.
Rhoads, D. and Michie, D., ed., Mark as Story, Philadelphia, Fortress, 1982.
Robinson, J.A.T., The Priority of John, London, SCM, 1985.
Sarup, M., An Introductory Guide to Post - Structuralism and Postmodernism ,
2nd ed., Hemel Hempstead, Harvester, 1993.
Saxby, H., The Time Scheme in the Gospel of John, Expository Times.
V o l . 1 0 4 / I , 1 9 9 2 , 9 - 13.
Schneiders, S.M., The Revelatory Text, San Francisco, Harper Collins, 1991.
Scott, D., Michael Polanyi, London, SPCK, 1996.
Servotte, H., According to John, London, DLT, 1994.
Shaw, F., Eyes to See and Ears to H e a r : Discernment of Revelation in the
Gospel of Mark, (Durham Univ. M.A. Thesis, 1993).
Sloyan, G.S., What are they saying about John ? , New York, Paulist Press,
1991.
Staley, The Print's First Kiss, Atlanta, Scholars, 1988.
Stibbe, M.W.G., John as Storyteller, Cambridge, University Press, 1992.
John , Sheffield, JSOT Press, 1993.
The Gospel of John as Literature : An Anthology of Twentieth
Century Perspectives, 1993.
John's Gospel, London , Routledge, 1994.
The Elusive Christ: A New Reading of the Fourth Gospel, JSNT
44, 1991, 1 9 - 3 8 .
Sylva, D.D., Nicodemus and his Spices, New Test. Stud, vol.34.1988,
148-151.
Tannehiil, R.C., The Disciples in Mark : The Functions of a Narrative Role, in
Telford, W., ed., The Interpretation of Mark, London, SPCK, 1985.
Temple, W., Readings in St. John's Gospel, London, Macmillan, 1949.
Thiselton, A.C., Address and Understanding : Some Goals and Models of
Biblical Interpretation as Principles of Vocational Training,
 112
Anvil vol.3.no.1. 101 - 1 1 8 .
Thompson, M.M., The Incarnate Word, Massachusetts, Hendrickson, 1988.

Signs and Faith in the Fourth Gospel, Bulletin for Biblical

Research 1,1991, 89 - 108.
Tovey, D.M.H., Narrative Art and Act in the Fourth Gospel, ( Durham Univ.
Ph.D. Thesis, 1994).
Tracy, D., Plurality and Ambiguity, London, SCM Press, 1987.
Vincent, M.R., Word Studies in the New Testament, vol.2,7/je Writings of
John, McLean, Macdonald (no date given).
Warner, M.,ed., The Bible as Rhetoric, London, Routledge, 1990.
Watts, F. and Williams, M., ed.. The Psychology of Human Knowing , London,
Chapman, 1988.
Websjer, E.C., Pattern in the Fourth Gospel, in Clines, D.J.A. ed.. Art and
Meaning: Rhetoric in Biblical Criticism, JSOT 1982, 230 - 257.
Westcott, B.F., The Gospel according to St. John, London, John Murray, 1908.
Wink, W., Transforming Bible Study, 2nd ed., Nashville, Abingdon Press,
1989.